FY24 Sustainability Report

Sanford Ltd
22 Jellicoe Street, Auckland 1010
PO Box 443, Shortland Street, Auckland 1140
www.sanford.co.nz
30 January 2025

FY24 Sustainability Report

Sanford Limited (Sanford) is pleased to present its FY24 Sustainability Report, which includes
Sanford’s first mandatory Climate-Related Disclosure (CRD) prepared in accordance with the
Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards.

Sanford’s FY24 Sustainability Report provides stakeholders with a view of its sustainability
performance, activities and outlook.

A copy of the report is also available on Sanford’s website at sanford.co.nz/investors.


For further information, please contact:
Paul Alston
Chief Financial Officer
palston@sanford.co.nz
021 918 033

---

Sustainability
Report
FY24

Sanford Limited’s FY24 Sustainability Report provides our
stakeholders with a view of our sustainability performance,
activities and outlook.
About this Report
Sanford has, during FY24, reviewed our
approaches for sustainability reporting to ensure
that balance is maintained. The result is the
creation of this report, which includes Sanford’s
first mandatory Climate-related Disclosure.
This report is available on Sanford’s website
sanford.co.nz/investors.
Period and Scope:
This report covers our sustainability
performance and activities for the 12-month
period from 01 October 2023 to 30 September
2024 (FY24), corresponding with Sanford
Limited’s financial year. This report focuses
on the performance of Sanford Limited,
operationally controlled entities and joint
ventures and operations.
Readers are cautioned to review the disclaimer
on page 12 of this report which applies to
Sanford’s climate-related disclosures and the
broader content of this report.
Contents
Sustainability at Sanford2
Sanford’s Sustainability Framework4
What Matters Most – Material Topics6
Sustainability in Action8
Climate-related Disclosure12
Aotearoa New Zealand Climate
Standards (NZ CS1, CS2 and CS3)
Disclosure Reference Table
30
1Sustainability Report FY24 |

Sustainability at Sanford
We understand that our operations can have
environmental, social and economic outcomes
and that our business and operational decisions
can influence those now and into the future.
Sanford’s first ‘triple bottom line’ sustainability
report was issued in 2000 which measured our
business performance in these areas being
environmental, social and economic. Since then
the scope of our sustainability reporting has
evolved through sustainable development reports,
integrated reports, the application of G4
Sustainability Frameworks and subsequently
the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards
for the structured reporting of sustainability
topics and integration of sustainability strategy
within our overall business strategy.
FY24 marks an inflection point in this approach,
as our business grapples with increasing external
reporting demand and seeks to achieve the right
balance of resource allocation to those reporting
tasks and progress within our organisation. In this
reporting year, we have chosen to channel
our resources to material areas where the
sustainability gains have the best chance of
success. The outcome is for the Sustainability
Report to be separated from our financial
reporting, and includes our mandatory climate-
related disclosures.
Sustainable Seafood
The term sustainable seafood,
or sustainability, is used a lot
in reference to the fishing
and aquaculture sectors;
it can mean different things
to different people. At Sanford,
we consider sustainable
seafood to be seafood that
is good for the planet,
people and business.
At Sanford, we consider sustainable seafood to be
seafood which is sourced from operations which:
• Are harvested or farmed in a manner that
provides for today’s needs while allowing
species and associated species to reproduce
in productive habitats and ecosystems
• Minimise harmful environmental impacts
• Assure good and fair working conditions
for those involved
• Are managed and regulated appropriately
as part of a well-functioning resource
management regime.
Sustainability extends into many aspects of
Sanford’s business and across the domains of
people, place and performance – aligning with the
traditional sustainability pillars of environmental,
social and economic. Sanford’s sustainability
framework is founded across those pillars and
based on engagement work throughout the
breadth of Sanford’s stakeholder community
to identify and prioritise the most important,
or most material, topics relevant for our business
and our stakeholders. Our sustainability framework
(see next page) outlines those sustainability
pillars, material topics, Sanford’s future vision
by material topic, key performance indicators
(KPIs) per material topic and alignment with the
United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals
(UN SDG).
3Sustainability Report FY24 | 2| Sanford Limited

Pillar
Performance and Operational Excellence
Pursue excellence across all functions and operations to drive business success,
increasing value and return for shareholders.
Place – Oceans,
Environment,
Ecosystems
Strive to demonstrate safeguarding
the environment, maximising
resource utilisation and minimising
Sanford’s footprint.
People, Customers,
Community
Aim to deliver outcomes for Sanford’s people,
for the consumers of Sanford’s products, and the
communities in which Sanford operates.
Material
Topics and
Focus Areas
Maximising
productivity and
$/kg returns from
the harvest.
Demonstrating
responsible
leadership – across
ethics, conduct,
transparency and
governance.
Adapting practices to
a changing climate.
Responsible risk
management.
Sustainable
management
of fish stocks.
Environmental
protection and
ocean health.
Reducing
operational
emissions
footprint.
Health, safety
and wellbeing
of Sanford’s
workforce.
Talent
attraction,
development
and retention.
The food
safety and
quality of
Sanford’s
products.
Relationships
with community
and iwi.
VisionExecution of strategy
to deliver better value
outcomes, improved
business margins
and financial
performance.
Being recognised as a
business that governs
with clearly defined
values for the good of
all stakeholders.
Deploying appropriate
and measured
responses to direct
and indirect climate
impacts across
strategy, investment
planning and
operations.
Clear identification
and prioritisation
of risks, enabling
the considered
deployment of
required mitigations
to manage those risks
to acceptable levels.
Fisheries’
stocks from
which
Sanford’s
harvests
continue
to be
maintained at
levels which
can sustain
ongoing
utilisation and
ecosystem
health.
Methods most
likely to ensure
and enable the
protection of
ocean health,
water quality,
sensitive
habitats and
threatened
species.
Reduction
of Scope 1
and Scope 2
carbon
emissions
intensity by
at least 5%
from a FY20
baseline by
FY30.
Workplaces
that protect
Sanford’s
people from
the risk of harm
and support
their wellbeing
through the
use of
initiatives,
behaviours
and cultures.
Workplace
conditions
and
behaviours
that support
staff
attraction,
development
and retention.
Leader in
providing safe,
high-quality
marine-sourced
products that
deliver on
customers’
expectations.
Respected
by local
communities
and iwi, with
established and
deep strategic
relationships
that create value
for Sanford,
its partners
and the
community.
Key
Performance
Metrics
Profitability and
productivity by
operational division.
Supplier code of
conduct adoption.
Number of climate
adaptation measures
delivered.
Number of risks
rated as ‘extreme’.
Risk mitigation
and measurement
deployment for
high-rated risks.
Percentage of
harvest with
no known
sustainability
issues.
Incidental
by-catch of
seabirds and
marine
mammals.
Percentage of
fully functional
processing and
support facility
environmental
permits.
Progress
towards FY30
emissions
target.
TRIFR*
Incident
investigations.
Action plan
closure.
Core people
process
completion.
Number of
quality-related
customer
complaints.
Provision of
targeted and
meaningful
support.
UN SDG
Alignment
Sanford’s Sustainability Framework
* Total Recordable Incident Frequency Rate
5Sustainability Report FY24 | 4| Sanford Limited

Material TopicScopeKey Policies and Management
Performance
and
Operational
Excellence
Maximising $/kg
of our harvest
(profitability and
productivity)
The economic productivity of our business,
enhancing our ability to provide returns to
shareholder investors, contribute towards local
and regional economies and job creation, including
our impact on the New Zealand economy.
· Overall business strategy
· Board Charter; Audit, Finance
and Risk Committee Charter
Responsible
leadership
– ethical
conduct,
transparency,
governance
Our leadership values, consideration of all
stakeholders in decision-making, approach to
business conduct, openness and ethics – within
our business processes and dealings with others
including our people, suppliers, customers,
regulators, community groups and others.
· Company Constitution, Board Charter
· Sanford Code of Conduct
· Code of Ethical Behaviour
· Continuous Disclosure Policy
· Protected Disclosures
(Whistleblower) Policy
Adapting to a
changing climate
Our business’s response to the changes brought
about as a result of climate change – across the
physical environment, the fisheries, marine water
and habitat quality, policy, markets, customers
and consumers.
· Sustainability Policy
· Overall business strategy
Risk managementHow we manage, mitigate, eliminate, control
and accept risks across the value chain of our
business – from our inwards materials, our
farming, harvesting, catching, processing and
storage operations to the customers, markets and
end consumers who consume those products.
· Risk management approach
· Audit, Finance and Risk
Committee Charter
Place –
Oceans,
Environment,
Ecosystems
Sustainable
management
of fish stocks
The direct impact of our operations on fish stocks
and fishery biomass, inclusive of our position as
fisheries quota owner to support the science-
based sustainable management and utilisation of
fishery resources.
· Fisheries Compliance Policy
· Sanford’s policy against shark finning
· Operational practices
implementation
Environmental
protection and
ocean health
The positive and negative effects of our operations
at land and sea on coastal and marine
environments in terms of water quality, habitats,
and threatened and protected species.
· Sustainability Policy
· ISO14001 Environmental
Management System
Reducing carbon
footprint and
emissions
Our direct emissions footprint from those activities
over which we have operational control, as well as
our indirect emissions footprint, both upstream
and downstream, within our value chain – and the
potential impact of those collective emissions on
climate change.
· Sustainability Policy
· Emissions-reduction target
People,
Customers,
Community
Health, safety
and wellbeing
of our people
The health and safety of our employees, share
fishers, contractors, and visitors to our sites and
on our vessels. The wellbeing of our employees
and share fishers.
· Health, Safety and Wellbeing Policy
· Health and safety management
system deployment
· Wellbeing initiatives, assistance
programmes
· People Safety and Health
Committee Charter
Talent attraction,
development
and retention
All Sanford’s permanent and temporary
employees and share fishers.
· Learning and Development Policy
· Remuneration Policy
Food safety and
quality
All food products we sell, including fresh
and frozen seafood, foodservice, wholesale,
consumer and ingredients.
· Food Safety and Quality Policy
· Food Safety System Certification
(FSSC22000)
· Regulatory and internal
audit systems
Community and
iwi relationships
Our relationships and collaborative approach with
communities and iwi living close to our operational
sites or activities; the effects of our activities on
those communities including fishing, growing,
processing, job creation, and support initiatives.
· Operational practices
Material Topics, Scope, Policies and Management
What Matters Most –
Sanford’s Material Topics
Sanford’s Approach
We have evaluated, prioritised, responded to and reported on
material topics in our annual report since 2014. We’ve re-engaged
with stakeholders on materiality over a two- to four-yearly cycle,
or when there is a significant shift within our external or internal
operating environment. We last undertook detailed materiality
engagement with our stakeholders during 2022.
7Sustainability Report FY24 | 6| Sanford Limited

Quality Complaints Breakdown
FY24FY23
Wrong product20%9%
Labelling error14%9%
Foreign material12%12%
Packaging12%3%
Quality defects10%41%
Date coding error8%2%
Weight control8%4%
Other4%3%
Temperature abuse4%0%
Bone4%0%
Under-delivered2%7%
Parasites2%3%
Product grading error0%3%
Product missing0%4%
Total number of justified quality complaints5071
Our commitment to continuous improvement
is further reflected in our audit performance.
This year, the number of key topics identified
in the Ministry of Primary Industries Performance-
based Verification audits was reduced from 37 in
FY23 to 28 in FY24. This 24% decrease highlights
our successful implementation of enhanced
quality control processes, systems and our ability
to address and resolve issues more efficiently
without using extra resources.
We have also embraced new technologies such
as INNOVA tablets to report quality inspections
on a single platform. This has enabled us to
zone in on defects and understand where
improvements are required.
Food Safety and Quality
As we review FY24, our Food Safety and Quality
Department highlights several achievements
that reflect Sanford’s dedication to these essential
principles. Ongoing efforts to enhance our quality
management system have yielded positive results,
emphasising our role in ensuring product safety
and quality.
Since July 2020, our Food Safety and Quality
Management System has undergone a significant
transformation, moving from a reactive approach
– primarily relying on testing and complaint
management – to a proactive strategy. This has
been instrumental in preventing issues before
they arise and has resulted in yearly reductions
in customer complaints, improving our performance
in regulatory and certification audits. Contained
within this reset from 2020, we continue to drive
change by focusing on ‘FAST, COLD, CLEAN +
LABELLING’ as our key success factors.
There has been a substantial reduction in
customer complaints in recent years. In FY21
we recorded 119 substantiated complaints.
In FY23, we recorded 71 substantiated complaints.
Through diligent quality management and
proactive measures, we reduced this number
to 50 substantiated complaints in FY24. This figure
reflects a 30% decrease from last season and a
58% decrease from FY21 to FY24. This reduction
highlights our emphasis on early detection and
resolution of potential issues.
Food safety and maintaining high-quality standards are crucial
for both our customers and our company. These elements are
critical for safeguarding consumer health, enhancing customer
satisfaction and building trust. Our commitment to delivering
safe and reliable products is not just a regulatory requirement
but also the cornerstone of our reputation and success. Quality
management supports us to meet and exceed customer
expectations, prevent issues before they arise and maintain
the economic viability of our business.
Sustainability in Action
We navigated regulatory changes this year.
Of note are:
• Allergen Declaration Transition: In February 2024,
we transitioned to new allergen declaration
requirements on our labels. This regulatory
change was managed without any disruptions,
and we have documented this transition in our
Management of Change records.
• Food Safety System Certification (FSSC 22000),
Version 6 Transition: We also successfully
transitioned from FSSC Version 5.1 to Version 6,
with the final changes implemented in April
2024. This transition involved key updates in
labelling, food defence, food fraud mitigation,
loss, waste activities and fostering a robust food
safety and quality culture.
As we look ahead, we aim to continue to refine our
processes, embrace new technologies and uphold
the highest standards of quality and safety. Our goal
is to further enhance our quality management
system and drive customer satisfaction.
9Sustainability Report FY24 | 8| Sanford Limited

Efficiency Approach to Reduce
Carbon Emissions for Sanford’s Fleet
Accessing and undertaking fishing activities
in deepwater locations requires large vessels,
long voyages and significant quantities of energy.
Battery technology is not ready as a replacement
for liquid fuels for these uses. These vessels
represent significant invested capital, have long
lifespans, and have limited potential for transfer
to alternative or renewable energy systems.
Lags in technology development delays the
fisheries sector’s ability to transition to low
carbon fuels at scale. As a result, Sanford’s
pathway to reduce emissions across our fleet
is to initially focus on reducing fuel costs
and emissions. One significant investment in
this approach is an upgrade that has been
implemented to the San Enterprise during
dry-docking in August/September 2024.
Efficiency upgrades being delivered for the
San Enterprise include a new propeller and
thrust nozzle design. Also, the electrical system
upgrades to provide for shore power connections
(to run the ship’s systems on mains-grid electricity
rather than diesel generator when berthed at
dock) create efficiencies. Sanford acknowledges
the assistance of the Energy Efficiency and
Conservation Authority (EECA) with those
elements of the efficiency upgrades. Other
associated fuel-efficiency upgrades being
deployed are an auxiliary generator upgrade,
replacing the primary fixed-speed-drive
refrigeration compressor with a variable-speed-
drive unit and economiser which will result in a
reduction of over 30% in energy demand for the
on-board refrigeration unit.
Sanford estimates the emissions-reduction
potential from the propeller and nozzle upgrades
alone to be around 500 tCO
2
e each and every
year that the San Enterprise is fishing.
Sustainability in Action
Sanford’s Whole Value Chain Emissions
Profile – FY24 (Scopes 1, 2 and 3)*
S
c
o
p
e

1

a
n
d

2
S
c
o
p
e

3
7
8
.
3
%
2
1
.
7
%
Sanford’s Whole Value
Chain Emissions Profile
Emissions
(tCO
2
e)
%% of Whole
Value Chain
Emissions
Scope 1
Direct emissions
(includes fuel,
refrigerants from
owned assets) 53,346 21.2
Scope 2
Indirect emissions
from electricity 1,354 0.5
Scope 3
Purchased goods
and services 108,899 43.3
Capital goods
15,838 6.3
Fuel- and energy-
related activities 13,210 5.3
Upstream
transportation and
distribution (freight
paid for by Sanford) 23,382 9.3
Waste generated
from operations 1,093 0.4
Downstream
transportation and
distribution (freight
of products paid
by others) 1,403 0.6
Use of sold products
(e.g. further
processing and
cooking of seafood) 14,356 5.7
End-of-life treatment
of sold products 18,500 7.4
* Operational Scope 1 and 2 emissions, as defined by the GHG Protocol
** Tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent
251,381 tCO
2
e** (FY24)
▼ 2.3% on FY20
Sanford’s Operational Emissions Profile
(F Y24)*
Emissions
(tCO
2
e)%%
Wildcatch
46,96585.9
Mussels
4,9669.0
Salmon
2,5474.7
Other (head office, etc.)
2220.4
* Operational Scope 1 and 2 emissions, as defined by the GHG Protocol
** Reduction on recalculated baseline emissions excluding inshore
contributions for like-for-like comparison, referenced on page 24
54,700 tCO
2
e (FY24)
▼ 12.4% on FY20**
Large-scale commercial fisheries operations are challenged
when it comes to emissions reductions.
11Sustainability Report FY24 | 10| Sanford Limited

Climate-related Disclosure
In preparing this climate statement, Sanford has applied the following adoption provisions available
under NZCS2:
• Adoption provisions 1 and 2: Current and anticipated financial impacts of climate-related risks
and opportunities.
• Adoption Provision 3: Transition planning. As required by NZ CS2, a description of progress towards
transition plan disclosure can be found within the strategy section of this statement.
• Adoption Provision 6: Comparative information for prior two reporting periods for each metric.
• Adoption Provision 7: Analysis of trends for each metric from previous reporting periods.
In reviewing this disclosure, readers are cautioned to consider the nature of changing environmental
conditions along with the scale and nature of uncertainties in the science of understanding changes to
the climate. Those climatic changes in turn lead to consequential changes within marine environments,
and further consequential changes to biological and ecological processes occurring within that
environment. The scale of the uncertainty in scientific understanding increases with each of the steps
from physical climate forecasts to marine physical responses, and then again to the ensuing biological
and ecological responses. Readers of this disclosure should consider those uncertainties when
evaluating representations.
This report contains forward-looking statements including metrics, targets and statements of future
intent. These statements necessarily involve assumptions, judgements, opinions, forecasts and
projections of the environment in which Sanford will operate in the future, each of which is subject
to levels of uncertainty. While Sanford has applied its expertise, industry knowledge and collective
experience to arrive at the conclusions and disclosures contained within this statement, these statements
are influenced by the uncertainty of the underlying assumptions, and scientific understanding of
consequential and cumulative climate factors influencing marine environments and marine biological
process. The forward-looking climate-related statements within this disclosure may therefore be less
reliable than other statements within Sanford’s other reporting. Sanford disclaims to the fullest extent
possible any liability arising from the use of this report. Nothing in this report should be inferred to be
capital growth, earnings, or any form of financial or legal guidance or advice.
This statement has been approved by the Board on behalf of Sanford Limited on 29 January 2025.
Sir Robert McLeod David Mair
Chair Managing Director
Statement of Compliance
Sanford Limited (Sanford) is a climate-reporting entity under
the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013. This statement represents
Sanford’s first mandatory climate-related disclosure in compliance
with the Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards (NZCS) issued
by the External Reporting Board (XRB). Unless otherwise indicated,
data, information and commentary relate to the financial year ended
30 September 2024 (FY24), and the reporting currency is the
New Zealand Dollar (NZD).
Please refer to page 30 for the Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards Climate-related Disclosure
Reference Table.
1. Sanford and Climate Change
Climate change is shaping the world. It is influencing the oceans where the seafood we harvest grows,
the markets we buy goods from and sell into, and the behaviours of our customers and consumers.
With long-standing harvesting and farming operations which are reliant on the natural world, Sanford has
had to adapt its operations over time to the changing nature of the oceans and weather conditions – it’s a
part of the very nature of fishing and marine farming. However, Sanford now faces a further challenge of
more wide-reaching accelerated change and unpredictability driven by climate change. We are focused
on responding to those changes.
New Zealand seafood products, and their low emissions footprint relative to other animal proteins,
1,2,3

are well placed to be established as a low-carbon source of nutrition for the global community.
Many of our operations require 365 days per year of care, attention and attendance to ensure we make
the most of the incumbent growing conditions and maintain the assets that allow us to safely and
efficiently harvest and grow seafood. In doing so, Sanford’s teams must deal with the changes in
conditions that the weather and climate bring – our fishers and farmers have learnt over time to ensure
that their primary operations are guided by the natural environment and its changing conditions. More
recently, our teams have experienced more frequent and persistent surface-water-warming events that
have led to algae blooms, more prevalent La Niña/El Niño events affecting growing conditions, more
frequent rainfall-driven harvest closures for mussel farms, along with significant acute climatic events
causing rainfall, flooding and slips which close roads and key supply routes.
While Sanford’s teams experience, observe and adapt to weather and marine conditions and their
impacts, forecasting longer-term climate induced potential changes quickly becomes increasingly
complex within the biophysical marine domain. Forecasting fisheries- and aquaculture-related
responses to climate change is challenged by the complexity of linked and nested systems. Changing
atmospheric conditions have an impact on the oceans and seas through changes to wave conditions,
surface-water temperatures, coastal and ocean currents, and ocean chemistry. Those varied oceanic
conditions can lead to changes in marine primary production, as well as in the biological responses of
fish, shellfish and other marine ecology. Scientific understanding of climate related effects across those
nested systems (atmospheric > oceanic > marine ecological) is still evolving. Looking into the future,
those systems test and challenge existing assumptions, knowledge and expertise.
The outcome means that when Sanford looks into future scenarios, as required under the climate-related
disclosure regime, a significant level of uncertainty must be acknowledged and accepted – a level
which might be greater than for many businesses in other sectors. Sanford considers the integration
of climate change-related considerations into our business strategy as a vital and necessary step
in ensuring that we are able to continue our 150+year heritage of providing beautiful seafood to
New Zealand and the world into the future.
1.
mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/57172/direct
2.
mpi.govt.nz/dmsdocument/48526/direct
3.
deepwatergroup.org/the-carbon-footprint-of-nz-wild-caught-seafood/
13Sustainability Report FY24 | 12| Sanford Limited

2. Governance
Board Oversight
Sanford’s Board of Directors is responsible for the oversight of risks and opportunities for Sanford,
including those related to climate change. The Board maintains responsibility for overseeing climate
change progress, and is provided with information on material climate-related matters at regular
meetings via management reports. During FY23 and FY24, the following in-depth climate-related
discussions were held with the Board:
• June 2023 – Overview of climate science and potential effects on our marine environment; review
of Sanford’s emissions footprint and emissions-reduction target; distribution of Institute of Directors’
Climate Governance survey.
• July 2023 – Climate-related Disclosure (CRD) overview and requirements, outcomes of management’s
climate risk and opportunity prioritisation workshop, outcomes of management’s future climate
scenario analysis workshop, review of climate risk prioritisation processes and outcomes; decision
that Sanford’s governance forum for climate-related topics is to be the Board.
• November 2023 – Review and approval of voluntary climate-related disclosures as part of Annual
Report 2023.
• November 2024 – Review of climate-related disclosure processes, revision to emissions-reduction
target, review of climate-related risks and opportunities, and review of draft climate-related disclosure.
• January 2025 – Confirmation of climate-related disclosure for issuance.
Skills and Competencies of the Governance Group in Relation to Climate Change
The Board reviews its performance, composition and structure on a regular basis and, with the support
of the Nominations Committee, plans for changes in Board composition to ensure skills and experience
are suitable to achieve the Board’s strategic and functional purpose. This includes climate change skills
and competencies.
Integration of Climate-related Risks and Opportunities into Strategy
Climate events have consistently been the number one priority risk for Sanford since 2016 when we first
disclosed publicly our top 10 enterprise-level business risks. This prominence within our risk register
means that climate-related risks and opportunities are considered by management and the Board in the
development and execution of our business strategy. In setting our strategic direction and business
planning, the Board considers regular updates on climate-related risks and opportunities from
management reports (see diagram below). In turn, divisional leads provide regular updates to executives
in relation to climate-related operational impacts. These channels have provided the foundation for
climate risk management strategies to be built into our business strategy.
On an annual basis, the Board reviews business targets and ambition for the forthcoming year, along with
progress against targets for the year prior, inclusive of targets relating to climate mitigation and climate
adaptation (see Metrics and Targets section below). During FY24, the executive team and the Board had
visibility of target progress indicators for the business, updated quarterly. Due to an internal emissions
accounting system upgrade which took place during FY24, Scope 1 and 2 carbon emissions progress
indicators were only available at year end. Climate performance metrics are not currently explicitly
incorporated into our remuneration policies or incentives.
Management’s Role in Assessing and Managing Climate-related Risks and Opportunities
The Board delegates to the Managing Director (MD) responsibility to manage the business to deliver on
strategy. The MD (along with the executive team) thereby holds accountability for the inclusion and
delivery of actions relating to climate change into risk management, business planning, business
processes and capital allocation within the overall budgets and financial delegations set by the Board.
The executive team is responsible for performing analyses and preparing annual reporting of climate-
related risks and opportunities, along with the identification of associated metrics and targets. During
December 2022, management co-ordinated in-depth climate risk workshops with a wide cross-functional
team from within Sanford, together with future climate scenario analysis to highlight and review risks,
opportunities and to stress-test our business model against those future climate potentials. Management
has discretion, within the limits of approved budgets and delegated financial authority, to utilise external
expertise to support those processes.
Board and Management Responsibilities in Relation
to Climate-related Risks and Opportunities
Board
Sanford’s Board
Sets strategic direction, reviews and approves strategic goals, operational plans and budgets. Reviews risk
assessment policies and controls and establishes the appropriate levels of risk appetite, including those related
to climate change. Sets risk management framework. Reviews, endorses and monitors progress against climate-
related risks, metrics, targets and disclosure. In addition to reporting from the AFRC (see below), the Board receives
updates at each meeting (about eight per year) on key sustainability and climate change issues and trends via
management reports from the executive team. Reviews remuneration policies and incentive schemes.
Audit, Finance and Risk Committee (AFRC)
A committee of the Board established to assist the Board in fulfilling oversight responsibilities in relation to financial
management and related reporting, including the review of overall systems for risk management across Sanford,
including climate risk as appropriate.
Nominations Committee
A committee of the Board established to assist the Board in fulfilling oversight responsibilities in relation to Board
composition and structure, including in relation to sustainability and climate-related expertise.
Executive
Managing Director and Executive Team
Manages the business to deliver on strategy. Applies the risk management framework. Accountability for including
actions and commitments relating to climate change into risk management, business planning, budgeting and
business processes. Identifies and monitors climate-related risks and opportunities and provides management
reports on those risks and opportunities to the AFRC and Board. Divisional leads engage directly with executives
on the operational impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities. Executive team allocates capital towards
climate-related mitigation and responses within the overall budget set by the Board.
Promotes a positive risk awareness
culture within the business. Monitors
processes for risk reviews, and reports
the same to the AFRC and Board
as relevant.
Reviews monthly sustainability
updates which include sections
on climate change policy,
regulation, trends, and
operational impacts.
Organises, facilitates and leads
climate scenario evaluation
and climate-related risk and
opportunity workshops.
Engages third-party experts to
assist when appropriate, such
as audits, climate research and
disclosure support.
General Managers
Responsible for ensuring that climate-related impacts and risks within each business unit are managed,
monitored and escalated appropriately.
Implements and acts on risk mitigation
strategies approved by the Board, MD
and executive team.
Monitors emerging and
developing risks, including those
relating to climate. Manages risk
reporting and monitoring of
residual risk levels. Climate-
related risks primarily overseen
by the GM Sustainability with
oversight of climate-related risks
reported and monitored by the
Group Risk Manager.
Manages the collection of data
to support tracking of metrics
internally or with external
assistance. Tracks climate-
relevant research, trends
and regulation.
Operations
Operations
All Sanford’s employees are empowered to be responsible for risk management. The Sanford Enterprise Risk
Assessment Guide provides the structural guidance at the operational level around risk tolerance and
notification levels using a scaled basis (very low or low rated events notified to supervisor/manager, medium-
rated events notified to GMs and managers, high-rated events notified to executives and GMs, and extreme-
level events notified to the MD, executive and Board).
As part of ongoing operations, management tracks and monitors proxies for climate impact, such as
water temperatures and dissolved oxygen concentrations in Big Glory Bay, Greenshell mussel condition
in Pelorus Sound and other major growing areas, water quality parameters, rainfall runoff-generated
harvest closures for marine farms, and catch rates for wild harvest species. This monitoring typically
occurs monthly. Although monitoring and measurement of these parameters is currently performed as
part of normal operations, these are yet to be collated into any specific ‘climate impact’ reporting metrics.
15Sustainability Report FY24 | 14| Sanford Limited

3. Strategy
Our Business Strategy
Sanford’s vision is to be New Zealand’s seafood leader for quality, value and reputation. We are
a vertically integrated seafood business with operations across wildcatch fisheries and aquaculture.
Sanford harvests wild and farmed seafood, converts that seafood into desirable products and sends
them through a supply chain to customers nationally and internationally. We last revised our business
strategy during 2022. A description of that strategy can be found in the publicly accessible Sanford
Annual Reports for FY22 and FY23.
4
During FY24, Sanford commenced reviewing strategic priorities
with a strong focus on improving cash flows and value outcomes.
Transition Planning
Sanford continues to work towards further development of our transition plan including its integration
into the FY25 business strategy review. An emissions-reduction plan has been developed alongside
our revised emissions-reduction target and is intended to be further developed during FY25.
Current Climate Impacts
Sanford’s operational activities have been affected by the following climate-related impacts in FY24:
Current physical impacts
Acute and extreme weather impacts
• Acute and extreme weather events impact Sanford’s operations and can affect our ability to service
our customers. Although not experienced in FY24, extreme events such as the flooding and rainfall
in the Nelson-Marlborough region during August 2022 led to temporary run-off water-quality-related
harvest closures for some marine farming areas and damage to marine farm infrastructure, combined
with the temporary closure of key road networks used to transport goods, materials and staff to and
from sites in the area.
• Climate-related events are also impacting our wildcatch harvesting operations with more extreme
weather events in the Southern Ocean, reducing the available fishing days for scampi fishing vessels
in areas surrounding the Auckland Islands.
• Changes in the Antarctic ice shelf are periodically increasing marine hazards, as well as changing
seasonality for our toothfish operations.
• Flooding events have affected road connections along key supply routes for Sanford’s materials
and products.
Climate driven changes in water temperature, chemistry and quality
• A recent ‘triple-dip’ La Niña climatic pattern which persisted through 2020, 2021 and 2022 contributed
towards marine physical process changes that act to reduce phytoplankton production and/or
accelerate algae blooms in key aquaculture farming areas, thereby affecting mussel growth rates.
• Those same La Niña-related marine physical processes contributed to significant marine heatwave
conditions being present in many coastal water bodies around New Zealand over the same 2020 to
2022 time period, with corresponding effects on phytoplankton density and population structure as
well as dissolved oxygen levels in upper surface-water layers. This contributed to a slight increase
in salmon mortalities being experienced during FY22 at the Big Glory Bay salmon farm.
• These events, along with climate-related risk assessments, prompted further deployment of mitigation
approaches during FY22, FY23 and FY24 at the Big Glory Bay salmon farm. This included deploying
additional pens to reduce stocking densities, more intensive monitoring of harmful algal, and greater
deployment of aeration and oxygenation equipment to improve fish health, welfare and resilience to
stress factors aggravated by climate change.
Current transition impacts
• Our stakeholders desire for, and increasing regulation in support of, greater clarity and understanding
of climate-related impacts on operations has resulted in Sanford’s teams spending more time
reviewing, investigating and improving adaptation tools for managing climate-related impacts.
• Sanford is an indirect participant in the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS). Fuel suppliers
surrender ETS units on our behalf for fuel purchasing, directly impacting Sanford’s cost base.
• Cost structures for some key inputs for our business units, in particular the cost of feed ingredients
required for farmed salmon, are susceptible to variability as a consequence of climatic impacts –
even if specific core ingredient sources are not directly affected.
Looking Ahead – Scenario Analysis
Sanford undertook a climate scenario analysis exercise in 2022 of which the Board had oversight, to
assist in forecasting climate-related risks and opportunities over the short, medium and long term, as
well as to test the resilience of our business strategy and model. The initial scenario analysis process
and 2024 review are described under the Climate Risk Treatment and Integration section below.
Three future climate scenarios were analysed, each of which represents an alternative potential future
(limited warming within +2.0°C, warming >4.0°C, and a divergent net-zero scenario where warming is
limited to 1.5°C through the deployment of strict and disordered policy approaches). Selection of those
scenarios was made to (a) ensure consistency of scenario approach across the New Zealand seafood
sector, and (b) add the divergent net-zero scenario, as it represents quite a different potential future not
captured within the Aotearoa Circle scenarios, one in which a strong and divergent policy approach is
used to successfully deliver emissions reductions. Sanford did not undertake its own specific modelling
in the development of those scenarios.
The boundary for the scenario analysis was at Sanford Group level, inclusive of all entities and
subsidiaries. The assessment accounted for direct operations as well as those within our direct value
chain (one step removed from Sanford), and upstream and downstream such as direct suppliers,
partners and customers. Time horizons relevant for the analysis were discussed and agreed on by
participants during the initial workshop in light of our business processes and strategy-setting practices.
Time horizons utilised for the scenario analysis and associated climate risk and opportunity
materiality were:
Time intervalYearsRelevant business process
Short term
1 – 5 years2023 – 2027Operational planning timeframes relevant for biological cycles
such as seed to harvest planning (mussels, salmon).
Medium term
6 – 10 years2028 – 2032Sanford’s strategic goals and targets typically set over these
timeframes, i.e. to 2030. More certainty of climatic impact and
policy settings across/during these timeframes.
Long term
10+ years2032+Longer-term strategy planning. Lifespan-relevant timeframe for
significant assets such as property and vessels.
4.
sanford.co.nz/investors/reports-1/company-reports/
17Sustainability Report FY24 | 16| Sanford Limited

Climate
scenarios
Kahawai 2050
“Orderly transition”
Divergent Net Zero
“Disorderly transition”
Mako 2050
“Intense and severe
outcomes”
Scenario
definition
source
Aotearoa Circle Marine Domain
“Kahawai” scenario (seafood
sector specific)
theaotearoacircle.nz/
reports-resources/marine-
scenarios-report
Network for Greening the
Financial System “Divergent
Net Zero” scenario
data.ene.iiasa.ac.at/ngfs/
(access terms and conditions
may apply)
Aotearoa Circle Marine Domain
“Mako” scenario (seafood
sector specific)
theaotearoacircle.nz/
reports-resources/marine-
scenarios-report
Scenario
description
Kahawhai, a relatively
abundant coastal finfish which
transition through several
stages of life development,
collaborating to avoid danger,
and well known to fight hard
when caught. This scenario
describes a 2050 world
that has succeeded in
implementing the Paris
Agreement and is likely to
keep warming below 2°C over
the course of the century.
Climate-related risks are
predominantly transitional
with cascading impacts on
governance and market
structures. This scenario
favours sustainable economic
growth but there is pressure
on business for agility and
flexibility to meet evolving
consumer preferences.
Global fisheries’ abundance
declines by around 10% but
New Zealand fares better than
most, with relative stability in
marine primary production
and increased catch potential
through advances in scientific
understanding and
management of fisheries.
Divergent Net Zero scenario
reaches net-zero emissions
around 2050 but with higher
transition costs due to
divergent policies being
introduced across sectors
leading to a rapid phase-out of
oil use. Climate-related risks
are dominated by transitional
events with substantial
carry-through to governance,
markets, and consumer
behaviour. Economic impacts
(modelled via GDP) are
significant and severe,
especially in the near-term.
Carbon price impacts are
severe but not equal across
all sectors. Fisheries’ resources
decline globally, but
New Zealand fares better
than most. Due to lagging
technology and long-life assets
in the marine sector, fisheries
and marine aquaculture
remain largely reliant on
fossil-energy sources and are
thereby affected more than
most by carbon price impacts
and adverse sentiment.
Mako are a fast, aggressive and
unpredictable shortfin shark
species. This scenario
describes a 2050 world where
change moves rapidly through
the marine domain. A failure to
curb emissions means that
humanity and nature are facing
the consequences of
significant climate disruption.
Climate-related risks are
predominantly physical with
cascading economic and
market impacts. This scenario
constrains adaptive resilience
in the face of deteriorating
marine ecosystems due to
weak global co-operation.
Fisheries operators must spend
a longer time at sea, travel
further, and incur greater
energy effort to harvest
fisheries. Warm-water species
begin migrating south
intermittently, while some
treasured inshore species
extend towards the south too
– with associated changes in
commercial fisheries’
allocations derived from quota.
Despite biological challenges,
food production is prioritised
by governments and many
regulatory roadblocks are
removed as nations seek to
shore-up food supplies. Marine
GO-engineering efforts are
underway as attempts to
weaken the level of warming
grow. Business resilience
planning becomes increasingly
necessary to secure affordable
capital from financiers.
Scenario analysis
end point
20502050, Net Zero2050
Climate policy
Immediate, smooth,
predictable
Strict and disorderedLagging, absent and/or
ineffective
2050 carbon
price estimate
(USD2010/tCO
2
e)
USD180USD700USD55
Climate
scenarios
Kahawai 2050
“Orderly transition”
Divergent Net Zero
“Disorderly transition”
Mako 2050
“Intense and severe
outcomes”
Transition risk
severity
(technology
and policy)
ModerateHighLow
Physical risk
severity
Low – mediumMedium – highExtreme
Representative
Concentration
Pathway (RCP)/
Shared
Socioeconomic
Pathway (SSP)
RCP 2.6
SSP 1
RCP 2.6
SSP 2
RCP 8.5
SSP 3
Global warming
average
<2
o
C1.5
o
C>=4
o
C
Climate impacts
(to 2050)
+0.7
o
C air temperature+0.7
o
C air temperature+1.0
o
C air temperature
Global population
(2050)
~8.5b~11.0b
Marine
biophysical
impacts
(to 2050)
+0.8
o
C coastal sea-surface
temperature
+0.8
o
C coastal sea-surface
temperature
+1.5
o
C coastal sea-surface
temperature
+0.23 m sea-level rise+0.20 m sea-level rise+0.28 m sea-level rise
8.0 pH ocean acidification8.0 pH ocean acidification7.94 pH ocean acidification
1% decline in dissolved oxygenNot specified in scenario
definition. For scenario analysis
purposes, physical marine and
fishery impacts assumed to be
consistent with the “Kahawai”
scenario.
2% decline in dissolved oxygen
Fishery
production
Net global reduction in primary
production (-2%). Some
fluctuation in species
distributions, some of which
impact fisheries management
Net global reduction in marine
primary production (-5%).
Greater uncertainty in fishery
stock location, migration, and
biological responses
NZ resource
and fishery
management
Regulation becomes more
flexible or makes use of
existing settings to allow for
flexibility (variation in catch,
addition of new species).
Decisions with high near-term
costs are taken to improve
long-term sustainability and
resilience.
Reactive responses by fishery
managers to changing
circumstances. Initial public
distrust and reduced
reputation give way to support
for primary sectors and their
role in national food security
and self-sufficiency.
Global
production in
seafood sector
124 MT Aquaculture
71 MT Fisheries
n/a160 MT Aquaculture
80 MT Fisheries
Climate Scenarios
Assumption on carbon sequestration from afforestation and nature-based solutions are not included.
19Sustainability Report FY24 | 18| Sanford Limited

Priority risk and
opportunity
Scenario descriptionKahawai 2050DivergentMako 2050Anticipated impact*Anticipated impact*Management responses Management responses
identified to dateidentified to date
Time horizon
ShortMed.LongShortMed.LongShortMed.Long
PHYSICAL
Risk
More frequent and severe
extreme weather events
impacting Sanford’s ability to
conduct operations and
service customers
Increased rainfall-related mussel harvest
closures, increases in weather-related
‘non-fishing’ days
Supply chain disruption (road closures,
flooding etc.) delay production and
customer deliveries
• Strategic allocation of geographically
diverse farm locations and quota
holdings
• Strategic investment in R&D, and
facilities for climate-resilient seed stock
for farms (e.g. SPATNZ)
• Direct monitoring of climate-relevant
water variables in key growing locations
• Allocation of capital towards climate
mitigation initiatives such as aeration
plant at Big Glory Bay
• Participation in sector-wide climate
adaptation pathway planning initiatives
via Aotearoa Circle
• Planned (FY25+) review of business
processes for capital expenditure to
provide structural response to reduce
climate risks and impact
• Recognition of the need for future
strategic response to identified
regulatory risks and anticipated
impacts on market preferences
Risk and/or
opportunity
Shifts in the distribution or
production capacity of
wildcatch fisheries due to
chronic climate-driven forces
Catch entitlement adjustment
(up or down)
Changed spawning behaviour or
success (positive and/or negative)
Increased by-catch rates
Risk
Adverse changes in water
temperature, chemistry and
quality, impacting the welfare
and/or productivity of farmed
species
SalmonSalmonSalmon
Increases in mortality
Changes (positive and negative)
in growth rates
Increased susceptibility of fish to
disease or stressors
MusselsMusselsMussels
Increased biofouling on shell and
on grow-out lines
Reduction in wild spat availability
and seed retention
TRANSITIONAL
Risk
Current and emerging
climate-related regulation
of the seafood sector
Increased compliance costs impacting
bottom line
Reduced operational flexibility (geography
and procedurally) leads to productivity
decline
Risk
Increased operational
costs due to climate-related
effects on core operational
inputs (e.g. fuel, packaging,
salmon feed)
Margins pressure as costs flow through
to sales expectation. Potential to lose
competitiveness in international markets
Fishing vessels spend more time tied up
(reduced asset utilisation if fuel costs rise
and cannot be passed on)
Risk and/or
opportunity
Changing consumer
preferences around
seafood and subsequent
impacts on the market
Changed demand for seafood (increase
for low-carbon foods, decrease for sectors
perceived as lagging in transition) – both
of which are applicable for seafood
Alternative proteins (cell culture or
similar) challenge traditional proteins
in marketplace
Climate-related Risks and Opportunities
During scenario analysis workshops, participants prioritised climate-related risks and opportunities
from an initial long list developed during an earlier workshop. To assess the materiality of these risks
and opportunities, the workshop utilised Sanford’s Risk Assessment Guide (SRAG) to allocate High,
Moderate or Low materiality ratings across each time horizon and scenario. The results of this activity
are shown in the table below.
Key
RatingActionSanford’s Risk Assessment Guide equivalence (2022)
High
Highest priority for management effortsExtreme
Moderate
Should be closely monitoredHigh
Low
Requires a level of monitoringLow
* In the absence of mitigation
Table 1: Climate-related risk and opportunities
Sanford integrates sustainability considerations into our capital expenditure decisions where relevant.
For example, we evaluated new hybrid diesel-electric propellers as part of upgrading our fishing fleet
and implemented oxygenation and aeration enhancements on our salmon farms.
21Sustainability Report FY24 | 20| Sanford Limited

4. Sanford Risk Management Processes
Risk management is directed and governed via Sanford’s Enterprise Risk Management Policy
and Enterprise Risk Management Framework, which are aligned with the ISO 31000:2018
Risk Management Guidelines. The Policy covers all value chain activities and requires that our
risk management processes consider all internal and external stakeholders that have an impact
on our operations. Sanford’s Risk Management Process (Figure 1 below) aims to support the
achievement of business objectives while also maintaining compliance with legal and regulatory
obligations. Our risk management approach follows a decentralised structure, where individual functions
and divisions are directly responsible for their own risk management, with the Group Risk Manager
co-ordinating internal communication of risks and maintaining the risk register, and the Board
of Directors being responsible at the enterprise level. The Group Risk Manager role is currently held
by the General Counsel.
Our risk management processes utilise Sanford’s Risk Register and Risk Criteria Guide which
defines the tools to assess the scope, size and impact of risks for our business. The criteria utilise a
‘Risk = Likelihood x Impact’ approach, where standard definitions are identified for impact (across five
impact categories from negligible to extreme, with example impacts per category being defined across
the following domains: assets, customer, environment, financial, health/safety, projects, legal, operations,
people, reputation and technology) and also for likelihood (across five categories ranging from ‘rare’ to
‘almost certain’).
Risk Management Process
Establish the content
Monitor and Review
Communicate and Consult
Identify risks
Treat risks
Assess risks
(Analyse and evaluate risks)
Climate Risk Treatment and Integration
Sanford’s initial climate risk prioritisation and scenario analysis process was performed as a stand-alone
exercise during late calendar year 2022, and involved a wide cross-functional and diverse group of
senior leaders within Sanford and consisted of two workshops facilitated by external specialists (Beca).
Specialists from across our executive team, operations, finance, communications, people, fisheries
science, and supply chain functions contributed to the process.
Risks were identified during initial workshops in late 2022, and then reviewed during 2024 against
Sanford’s Risk Criteria Guide (as described above):
• Risk Prioritisation Workshop – 28 November 2022. Identification of the highest-ranked priority risks
and opportunities
• Climate Scenario Analysis Workshop – 12 December 2022. Testing of the six-highest ranked priority
risks and opportunities under Sanford’s three future climate scenarios
• Reviews of risk ratings and criteria – 07 to 15 May 2024. Review of climate risk descriptions, ratings,
mitigations and metrics by operations leads for select risks.
We anticipate to review our Risk Management Process for climate-related risks on an annual basis.
To focus efforts towards the most material climate-related risks and opportunities, following the
prioritisation process, the three top-ranked physical and transitional climate-related risks/opportunities
respectively were selected for further consideration in terms of response, remediation and mitigation.
The specific risks and opportunities are shown in Table 1: Climate-related risks and opportunities, per
pages 20-21. Those priority climate risks, along with responses and mitigations, are reviewed on a
yearly basis.
Climate risks are integrated within the enterprise-wide Risk Register collectively. Climate risks are
aggregated as a single representative risk and then prioritised alongside the other (non-climate-related)
enterprise risks. Climate risk is currently the number one ranked risk on Sanford’s enterprise-wide
Risk Register. The top 10 enterprise risks are reported to, reviewed, and rankings/responses discussed
by the Board at least annually.
To identify climate-related risks, Sanford’s teams employ the following tools and methods:
• Active monitoring of water quality conditions (temperatures, dissolved oxygen, algal populations)
at salmon aquaculture sites
• Shellfish monitoring programmes to review shellfish condition
• Monitoring climate-driven growth and yield forecasts for salmon and mussels
• Regularly review fisheries’ harvests, catch per unit effort, by-catch rates, weather-related delays,
and fuel costs to optimise operations.
Figure 1. Risk Management Process. (Source: Sanford Enterprise Risk Management Framework, November 2023).
23Sustainability Report FY24 | 22| Sanford Limited

ScopeCategoryFY24FY23Base year
FY20
1
Direct emissions (fuel, refrigerants) (tCO
2
e)53,346 56,16559,999
2
Indirect emissions from electricity, location based (tCO
2
e)1,3541,4932,423
3
Indirect emissions from value chain, upstream and downstream
(tCO
2
e) (measured Scope 3 categories described below)
196,681184,386194,774
Sanford’s Group intensity metrics*
Scopes 1, 2 and 3 emissions per $ revenue (tCO
2
e/thousand$)0.500.470.63
Scopes 1, 2, and 3 emissions per greenweight tonne (GWT)
harvested (tCO
2
e/tonnes GWT)
2.312.352.31
Scopes 1 and 2 emissions per GWT harvested (tCO
2
e/tonnes GWT)0.910.870.85
Wildcatch division intensity metrics
Scope 1 and 2 emissions per GWT harvested (tCO
2
e/tonnes GWT)1.611.431.49
Mussels division intensity metrics
Scope 1 and 2 emissions per GWT harvested (tCO
2
e/tonnes GWT)0.190.190.18
Salmon division intensity metrics
Scope 1 and 2 emissions per GWT harvested (tCO
2
e/tonnes GWT)0.500.600.46
Details and Assumptions in GHG Inventory
We measure our impact and emissions in accordance with Sanford’s GHG Reporting Policy, which
follows the GHG Protocol. Key details from that policy are shown in the table below:
* FY20 - Base-year emissions were audited by Toitū Envirocare and represents actual emissions, noting the adjustments to the base year data as
detailed below. These adjustments ensure like-for-like comparison across the disclosed years.
FY20 to FY23 emission, revenue and harvest data has been adjusted to exclude a material business change being the sale of the inshore business
in FY23. Sanford retains the inshore related quota shares and leases the Annual Catch Entitlement (ACE) going forward (further information is
disclosed in the FY24 Annual Report at note 20).
Sanford Group’s harvest represents total harvest (excluding inshore harvest) from Sanford and third parties’ harvesting under Sanford’s quota
or contract; this data therefore includes fishing partner harvest tonnage.
Wildcatch intensity (Scope 1 and 2) for fishing operations (excluding the inshore business) are based on GWT caught by Sanford-owned vessels
and processed at sea or at Sanford’s land-based operations.
Mussels’ intensity (Scope 1 and 2) for farming operations based on GWT harvested by Sanford-owned vessels and Sanford’s mussel processing sites.
Our systems do not have the full capability to itemise all Scope 3 emissions categories by business division; accordingly, Scope 3 emissions are
included in the Group intensity metrics only.
5. Metrics and Targets
Greenhouse Gas Emissions:
DetailApproach, assumption, basis
Annual measurement period
01 October to 30 September, following our financial year cycle
Base emissions measurement
year
FY20: 01 October 2019 to 30 September 2020
Base-year assurance
FY20 emissions assurance provided by Toitū Envirocare following ISO 14064-1
assurance standard
Base-year recalculation
approach
The following events shall trigger a recalculation of the FY20 base year to ensure like-for-
like comparisons: structural changes to our business, substantial changes by third parties
to emissions factors, or discovery of significant errors or a number of cumulative errors that
exceed a 5% materiality threshold. Organic growth or decline does not trigger recalculation.
Base-year recalculation
At the conclusion of FY23, Sanford’s direct North Island inshore operations ceased
with two vessels being sold along with the rights to fish for a period of 10 years.
That constituted a material change to the business as defined by Sanford’s base-year
recalculation approach. The emissions associated with these operations essentially
moved from Sanford’s Scope 1 and 2 emissions to Scope 3 category 13 emissions.
Consolidation approach
Operational control basis, as defined by the GHG Protocol
Organisational boundaries
All of Sanford’s New Zealand and Australian operations, including joint ventures and
investments. Sanford’s GHG inventory covers all direct (Scope 1 and 2) and material indirect
(Scope 3) emissions categories – see definition below for the Scope 3 emissions boundary.
Exclusions
The following entities, which Sanford had an interest in during the period, are excluded from
our GHG emissions inventory: Two Islands Co NZ Limited (50% ownership, sold during
FY24), Barnes Oysters Limited (14.29% ownership), Primestone Nominees (75% ownership,
closed during FY23), New Zealand Japan Tuna Company Limited (46.74% ownership), Area
B Compliance Limited (26.9% ownership), Bluff Oyster Management Company Limited
(15.79% ownership), Sugarloaf Port Company Limited (12.19% ownership).
Data quality and uncertainties
Sanford utilises the BraveGen tool for emissions inventory collation and reporting.
All activity data is reliant on supplier invoice accuracy and other data input. Ultimate
emissions data is the result of both those input data and the source uncertainty of, and
system input of, external emissions factors and spend-based factors. Sanford self-
assesses the data sources for quality as follows: High – actual usage data from supplier
or internal systems; Medium – a mixture of actual data activity and data estimations; and
Low – high use of estimates and assumptions. Sanford’s emissions data is assessed as
follows: Scope 1 and 2 data quality – High, Scope 3 data quality – Low.
Scope 3 emissions boundary
Scope 3 emissions GHG Protocol categories are screened (last screening FY21)
and subject to a 1% materiality threshold measured across all Scope 3 categories.
This resulted in Scope 3 categories C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C9, C11 and C12 being deemed
material categories (and all others being deemed immaterial categories). C15 is included
as it represented joint-venture North Island Mussel Ltd operations during FY24.
A cumulative exclusion threshold for Scope 3 is set at 5% (the cumulative exclusions
do not exceed this value).
Emissions factors
Emissions factors used in Sanford’s inventory are based on the latest information
deployed within the third-party-maintained BraveGen software system’s emission factor
library which utilises those available from:
New Zealand Ministry for the Environment
DEFRA (Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs, UK)
Auckland Council spend-based factors (consumption emissions modelling)
National Greenhouse Account factors (Australian National Greenhouse Accounts
Factors (dcceew.gov.au))
California Air Resources Board (arb.ca.gov/resources/documents/high-gwp-refrigerants).
And in the absence of those, relevant sector information is utilised.
For key emissions-intensive suppliers’ specific emissions, factors direct from suppliers’
own data, analysis, and life-cycle assessment studies are utilised.
Emissions factors use the Global Warming Potential (GWP100) basis unless otherwise listed.
Gases included in inventory
All Kyoto Protocol greenhouse gasses: CO
2
, CH
4
, N
2
O, HFCs, PFCs, SF
6
.
Recalculations implemented
in FY24
Scope 3 category 1 component contractor vessel fuel calculation approach changed for
FY24 based on greenweight caught by these vessels and emissions-intensity EU standard
(Energy transition of fishing fleets: Opportunities and challenges for developing countries).
25Sustainability Report FY24 | 24| Sanford Limited

Climate Metrics
Business activities vulnerable to physical and transition risks
Sanford has assessed that, given the nature of our business, collectively, and in the absence of mitigation:
up to 100% of our business activities are vulnerable to the climate-related physical risks identified
above; and up to 100% of our business activities are also vulnerable to the transition risks identified.
Capital deployment towards climate-related risks and opportunities
During FY24, Sanford continued it’s investment in equipment and systems to reduce some of the
identified climate-related risks, including implementing oxygenation and aeration systems at Big Glory
Bay to improve the resilience of salmon during periods of challenging water-quality conditions,
pen-cleaning machinery to improve through-pen water flows, and fuel-efficiency upgrades for the
San Enterprise deepwater fishing vessel. The total amount of spend across these initiatives during FY24
was NZ $3.3 million.
Business activities aligned with climate-related opportunities
Two climate-related opportunities are identified in the priority risk and opportunity table (see pages
20-21), being ‘shifts in the distribution or production capacity of wildcatch fisheries’ (which may be a
risk and/or an opportunity, applicable for the wildcatch segment) and ‘changing consumer preferences
around seafood’ (which may be a risk and/or an opportunity applicable to the entirety of Sanford’s
product portfolio). In the case of fisheries’ stocks, scientific understanding is not yet developed to a
sufficient level to identify the quantum of shift for each specific fishery. However, in an overall sense
New Zealand fisheries stocks are likely to be in a better position than global peers due to geographic
location benefits where displaced cold-water species are replaced by other warm-water species.
5

It is currently not possible to determine a percentage of activity aligned with this opportunity, within
our available data, but we are looking to improve this over the course of FY25.
In the case of changing consumer preferences towards seafood, this increases in demand for low-carbon
nutrition and protein represent an opportunity for seafood (per benchmaking in life-cycle assessment
studies). While significant barriers for further emissions reductions for the sector (technology, asset
lifespan, geographies etc.) represent a similar scale of downside risk towards consumer preferences.
Accordingly, 100% of Sanford’s activities are considered as aligned with that opportunity, although there
is an equivalent level of business risk present also. Over time, and as consumer behaviours in this space
develop, Sanford anticipates that it will be possible to refine both the opportunity and risk profile towards
a greater level of precision.
Other metrics
Sanford does not utilise an internal emissions pricing schedule at present, and management
remuneration is not linked to climate-related risk.
Ta r g e t s
In our 2023 Annual Report, we disclosed three climate-related targets:
• Reduction of 25% absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions by FY30 from a FY20 baseline
• Deliver on six business projects in support of emissions reductions in FY24
• Implement seven climate-adaptation measures and projects within the business in FY24
(six internal, one external).
Progress Towards Targets in FY24
5.
Cheung W et al., 2019. Future scenarios and projections for fisheries on the high seas under a changing climate.
IIED Working Paper. IIED London.
6.
NZX, New Zealand’s Exchange Announcement Overview
Target for FY24Progress in FY24
Reduction of 25%
absolute Scope 1 and 2
emissions by FY30 from
a FY20 baseline
Achieved to date
Sanford achieved a 12.4% reduction in absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions in FY24 relative to
an adjusted FY20 baseline. A number of projects contributed to this significant reduction, such
as efficiency upgrades on deepwater vessels, transition to plug-in hybrid electric vehicle fleet,
and phasing of coal use.
The FY20 baseline and subsequent years were adjusted for the purposes of target measurement
for FY24 to remove the contributions from the North Island inshore fishery assets, which were
sold at the commencement of FY24 as part of the Moana transaction.
6
The adjustment is made
to ensure ‘like for like’ year-on-year comparisons following material business changes.
The FY30 emissions-reduction target has been reviewed during FY24 and replaced with a new
intensity-based target (see below).
Deliver on six business
projects in support of
emissions reductions
in FY24
Achieved
During FY24, Sanford delivered the following projects in support of emissions reductions across
the business:
• Completed San Enterprise deepwater vessel fuel-efficiency upgrade works
• Achieved an on-time and on-budget status for new diesel-electric Scampi vessel build project
(San Koura Rangi)
• Delivered a hybrid (with battery energy storage) feed barge to Big Glory Bay salmon farm
• Upgraded generators and compressors used for aeration and oxygenation support at
Big Glory Bay salmon farm to more fuel-efficient models
• Upgraded and rolled out a business-wide emissions measurement software system
• Engaged with fuel suppliers and marine-sector participants on future marine fuels collaborations.
Seven climate-
adaptation measures
and projects
implemented and
completed within the
business in FY24
(six internal,
one external)
Partially Achieved
During FY24, the following business-adaptation projects were implemented and completed:
• Integration of climate risk planning into Sanford’s overall Enterprise Risk Management
frameworks
• Contribution towards the completion and implementation of seafood sector-wide climate-
adaptation pathways. Facilitated by the Aotearoa Circle, this project resulted in the
implementation of climate-adaptation pathways for the deepwater trawl wildcatch,
salmon aquaculture, and mussel aquaculture sectors
• Review of emissions factors utilised within Sanford’s emissions reporting software
and accounting system to ensure all factors use the same Global Warming Potential
(GWP100) basis
• Review and determination of percentage of business activities vulnerable to climate-related
risks and opportunities for climate-related disclosure purposes.
The following business-adaptation projects were partially (not fully) achieved during FY24:
• Review of internal capital expenditure processes and systems to account for climate risks
• Completion of a climate transition plan for Sanford (this is now anticipated to occur during
FY25). Sanford made progress towards its transition plan in FY24, including developing
its emissions-reductions plan and revised emissions-reduction target
• Determination of the current and anticipated financial impacts of climate-related risks
and opportunities.
27Sustainability Report FY24 | 26| Sanford Limited

2030 Emission-reduction Target
Sanford has reviewed and replaced its absolute Scope 1 and 2 GHG emission-reduction target during
FY24. This revision has been prompted by changes in a combination of internal and external factors and
assumptions which supported the prior target. It has become apparent that in setting the prior target,
some key assumptions – including those relating to the domestic availability and cost of sustainable
marine fuels (blendable, drop-in-diesel replacements), and policy settings to support these – are
unlikely to be realised before the FY30 target date. Sanford is also anticipating volume growth which
means an absolute emissions reduction target will be difficult to achieve. Accordingly, the earlier
absolute reduction FY30 target is no longer considered viable. As a result, we have adopted a new
intensity-reduction FY30 target as follows:
• >=5% reduction in GHG intensity (tCO
2
e / greenweight tonne harvested) for Scope 1 and 2 GHG
emissions by FY30 from a FY20 baseline.
Sanford considers it is important to retain an intensity-reduction target, because, although Sanford’s
absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions had reduced by 12.4% in FY24 compared to the FY20 baseline
(excluding inshore contributions) Sanford’s FY24 Scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity (tCO
2
e/GWT)
increased by 7% compared to the FY20 base. We experience an increase in Scope 1 and 2 emissions
intensity per greenweight tonne relative to FY20 in each of FY21, FY22 and FY23 as harvest activity in
both the wildcatch and mussels divisions reduced. During FY24, harvest activity decreased due to lease
of inshore Annual Catch Entitlement as did the year-on-year absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions (Figure 2).
Sanford’s modelling for the updated intensity target assumes some limited harvest volume growth across
aquaculture operations and relatively unchanged harvest volumes compared to prior periods for the
wildcatch division, as well as successful deployment of energy-efficiency projects across the business.
In the absence of an applicable Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) sector pathway which
appropriately covers the fisheries and aquaculture sectors,

Sanford does not currently consider
that our target is able to be referenced with a pathway which limits global warming to 1.5
o
C. In addition
the lack of an applicable sector pathway, is due to:
• The nature of more than 85% of Sanford’s Scope 1 and 2 emissions being ‘hard to abate’ (i.e. those
emissions derived from high capital value and long-life assets, where technological decarbonisation
solutions are lagging – e.g. large deepwater fishing vessels).
• The existing lack of policy support, logistics and infrastructure for domestic and price-competitive
sustainable marine fuel deployment in New Zealand at scale prior to FY30.
Sanford’s emissions-reduction pathway does not currently assume the use of offsets.
Progress towards achieving our revised GHG emissions-reduction target is indicated below:
The trend showing Sanford’s whole value-chain emissions intensity based on economic output ($ revenue)
is indicated below:
Sanford has been successful at gaining value from the harvest, leading to a reduction in Scopes 1, 2
and 3 emissions intensity per $ revenue from FY20 to FY23. However, in FY24, the increase in intensity
reflected a growth in Scope 3 emissions (Figure 3). Sanford’s challenge is to ensure the deployment of
efficiency projects, fuel changes and behavioural change projects internally to deliver further emissions
reductions as the harvested GWT grows.
Key risks that have potential to affect our ability to reduce emissions effectively and achieve our new
intensity target include:
• Volume growth through production efficiency gains in the mussels and salmon sectors to deliver
lower Scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity across the portfolio of seafood – risks to that growth include
hatchery production and associated biological system performance.
• Sanford’s pathway requires that emissions mitigation actions are taken, such as efficiency
improvement projects like recent propeller and nozzle upgrades, auxiliary generator upgrades,
and boiler enhancements on some of our largest deepwater vessels. The availability and cost of
finance to fund these projects represent a risk to achieving the target.
• ‘Hard to abate’ emissions from our vessel fleet dominate Sanford’s Scope 1 emissions profile.
Figure 2: Graph showing progress against absolute emissions and Sanford’s revised GHG emissions-intensity target
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
0.04
0.06
1.00
0.08
Absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions (tCO
2
e)
Excluding inshore business
Emissions intensity (tCO
2
e/GWT)
FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24FY25FY26FY27FY28FY29FY30
-12.4% reduction
on FY20 absolute emissions
Intensity target -5%
Absolute Scope 1 and 2 emissions (tCO
2
e)
Scope 1 and 2 emissions intensity (tCO
2
e/GWT)
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
Emissions intensity (tCO
2
e/$000's revenue)
FY20FY21FY22FY23FY24
Figure 3: Graph showing Scopes 1, 2 and 3 emissions intensity per sales revenue
Scopes 1, 2 and 3 emissions intensity (excluding inshore business)
29Sustainability Report FY24 | 28| Sanford Limited

Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards (NZ CS1, CS2 and CS3)
Disclosure Reference Table
ObjectiveCategory Page Reference in Report
Governance6-7. Disclosures
8. Governance body oversight
9. Management’s role
14-15
14-15
14-15
Strategy10. Disclosure objective
11. Disclosures
12. Current impacts and financial impacts
13. Scenario analysis undertaken
14. Climate related risks and opportunities
15. Anticipated impacts and financial impacts
16. Transition plan aspects of its strategy
16-17
16-17
16, 17, 24, 26
18-19
20-21
17
16
Risk management17. Disclosure objective
18. Disclosures
19. Disclosures
15, 22, 23
15, 22, 23
15, 22, 23
Metrics and targets20. Disclosure objective
21. Disclosures
22. Metric categories
23. Targets
24. GHG emissions
24-29
24-29
24-29
24-29
24-29
Assurance of GHG
emissions
25 and 26. Assurance of GHG emissionsN/A prior to 27th Oct 2024 requirement
NZ CS 3 Requirements40-42. Comparative metrics
44-46. Consistency
47-50. Restatement of comparatives
49. Methods and assumptions and data and
estimation uncertainty
51. Scenario analysis methods and assumptions
52-54. GHG emissions methods, assumptions, and
estimation uncertainty
24
24
17

17
17-21

24-25
55-56. Statement of compliance12
30| Sanford Limited