Mainfreight Sustainability and Climate Report 2026

Sustainability and Climate Report2026

CULTURE
FAMILY
PHILOSOPHY
CULTURE, FAMILY, PHILOSOPHY - THE MAINFREIGHT WAY
THREE PILLARS OF MAINFREIGHT
·
Eat together – use mealtimes
as a discussion time
·
Listen to each other
·
Share the profits and the
successes
·
Openly discuss problems and
openly solve them
·
Don’t beat up your brothers
and sisters
·
Have respect – seek it from
others and show it by actions
·
One-hundred year company
·
Profit comes from hard work, not
talk
·
We are driven by margin, not
revenue
·
Train successors, so that you may
advance
·
An enduring company is built by
many good people, not a few
·
We “care” for our customers,
environment and community
·
Total quality management base
·
Ready, Fire, Aim
Our company is built on our Three Pillars – Culture, Family, and Philosophy,
articulated over 20 years ago. These core values continue to shape our
approach to people, planet, and the way we do business.
·
Under-promise, over deliver
·
Keep reinventing with time
and growth
·
Education is optional, learning
is compulsory
·
Let the individuals decide
·
Keep it simple
·
Tear down the walls of
bureaucracy, hierarchy and
superiority
·
Avoid mediocrity – maintain
standards and beat them
·
Look after our assets
·
Immaculate image and
presentation
·
Promote from within
·
Integrity – how it affects
other people
·
No job descriptions
2
4
13
21
22
Overview
Environmental
Social
Governance
Climate-related
Disclosure Report
2
3
3
5
10
12
14
16
20
21
21
54
55
22
23
25
27
41
46
50
52
53
Three Pillars of Mainfreight
Message from Don
Sustainability at a Glance
Climate Change
Waste Management
Water Security
Community
Te a m
People in the Value Chain
Reporting & Disclosure
Corporate Governance Resources
GRI Index
Glossary
Introduction
Governance
Risk Management
Strategy
Metrics & Targets
Additional Information
Assurance Report
NZ CS1 Content Index
TCFD Content Index
2
Overview

In 1978 Bruce Plested started this business with a small amount of capital and a
passionate desire to be better for the transport customers of New Zealand.
Alongside the aspiration to do better, Bruce wanted the people of Mainfreight
to be proud of what they achieved every day, which was the beginning of our
discretionary bonus system that shares the profits of the business with those who
earn them, providing they improve year on year.
He also had a desire to recycle and to be as sustainable as we possibly could
be. Wooden pallets were used for firewood; and plastic, glass and metal were
recycled. A large, discarded, milk storage tank from the side of the road during
Bruce’s travels became our first attempt at recycling rainwater from the roof of
our Auckland freight terminal – the beginning of rainwater collection to clean
our vehicles.
Typical of our attitude, we did not shout from the roof tops about our recycling
of waste or water. It was just what we did around here.
Our sustainability approach has never been more important than now.
Within this sustainability report we document the progress we are making
towards improving the environment and the initiatives underway to lower our
own carbon footprint and that of our customers. We are also working closely
with our suppliers of service, airlines and shipping companies.
These suppliers are working hard to find suitable and sustainable fuels for the
future of their planes and ships. The use of Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) with
our partner airlines continues to be explored. A similar project for sea freight
is currently under negotiation. The use of biofuel (HVO) in Europe for road
vehicles has now become a regular source of fuel from our early trials. In New
Zealand an early trial of a hydrogen powered road linehaul unit is currently in the
planning stage.
As a consequence of the Middle Eastern conflict, the cost of fuel, in particular
diesel, has increased significantly. Diesel remains the necessary fuel for freight
distribution until electrification, biofuels and alternative fuels find their place in
freight distribution. Cost, efficiency and availability remain the inhibitors. Until
we find scale with these alternative energy sources, diesel remains the primary
source.
In this report we also provide commentary of our culture and efforts to help
improve the lives of our people and our community.
We believe that our commitment to sustainability, our communities, and our
people, are key reasons why customers trust us with their supply chain solutions.
This approach will play a crucial role in the future of all supply chain decisions.
Message from Don
Sustainability at a Glance
Environmental
Network
SocialGovernance
1, 610 , 4 0 8
tCO2e, down 2.8% (intensity
factors continue to improve)
10,839
Team Members
50,000+
books gifted to children
with Mainfreight’s support
via Books in Homes
4years
of Climate-related
Risk Reports
8years
of independently verified
GHG emissions inventories
across all scopes
27
Countries
425+
scholarships awarded
to family of team
members since 2007
$46.3million
to be paid in team bonuses this year
30years
as an NZX listed entity
331
Branches
12.0MW
in rooftop solar
arrays, up 28%
11. 8MWh
in battery energy
storage, up 21%
62%
of small vehicle
fleet hybrid
and electric,
up 8%
89%
of forklifts
electric,
up 3%
1.5%
of heavy
fleet electric,
in line with
2025
3
3Overview

Environmental
Climate Change
Waste ManagementWater Security
Transportation
Infrastructure
Operations
Reducing our Impact
Supporting Circularity
Water Resources
Water Systems
Global surface temperatures remain elevated, with recent
years tracking close to or higher than 1.5°C above pre-
industrial levels. This reflects a steady warming trend, with
shorter-term climate drivers like El Niño expected to further
amplify changes to weather patterns and climate conditions.
At these levels of warming, the impacts are already being
felt. More frequent and severe weather events are disrupting
infrastructure, communities, and global trade. For a logistics
business, this is felt in a variety of ways, from delays across
transport networks to increased pressure on our branches and
operations. What were once isolated events, are increasingly
part of normal operating conditions.
This reinforces a broadening of organisational responses to
climate change. Reducing emissions remains critical, but it
is no longer enough on its own. We also need to ensure our
network is resilient, and able to operate safely and reliably in a
less predictable environment.
It is therefore not surprising that climate change remains our
most material sustainability topic. It reflects both the nature of
our industry, and the role we play in keeping our customers’
supply chains moving.
Despite this, there are reasons for optimism: developments
in scientific understanding, low emission technology, and
advanced fuels and manufacturing are slowly beginning to
emerge. Most satisfyingly, we continue to find like-minded
customers to collaborate with in creating more sustainable
supply chains.
International supply chains play a significant role in the
generation of waste; from packaging and consumables
through to surplus inventory and end-of-life materials. As
pressure builds on the world’s finite resources, it’s clear
that traditional linear, take-make-dispose models are not
enduringly sustainable.
Waste is not only an environmental issue, it points
to inefficiency, missed recovery opportunities, and
unnecessary cost. For a business like ours, managing waste
is both a responsibility and a practical lever to improve how
we operate.
Our approach starts with understanding the waste we
generate and identifying straightforward ways to reduce
it. This means removing unnecessary materials, shifting
away from single-use items where possible, and ensuring
what remains is reused or recycled rather than sent to
landfill. We focus our efforts across two areas: reducing our
impact within our own operations, and supporting greater
circularity across the supply chains we are part of.
Climate change is placing growing pressure on water
systems globally. Prolonged dry periods and water stress
are becoming more common, while more intense rainfall and
storm events are overburdening wastewater systems and
risking contamination of water supplies.
Simultaneously, demand for water continues to climb, driven
by population growth, industrial expansion, and agriculture.
Together, these dynamics are tightening the availability of a
resource that we all need, and have largely taken for granted
in developed economies.
While Mainfreight is not a major commercial water user,
we have long championed the responsible use of water
and recognise the important role that industry can play in
supporting its conservation.
Our approach is centred around our expansive roof spans
acting as water catchments, paired with storage, filtration,
greywater recycling and a disciplined approach to water
consumption.
Water is, above all, a public good, and we see it as our
responsibility to minimise our footprint so that we don’t
impose on the needs of the local communities we are part of.
4Environmental

Transportation
Road TrainsIntermodal Connectivity
Our Fleet
Our vehicles are our billboards, and the clean, well
maintained and modern fleet we operate is a reflection
on our business and the expectations of our customers.
Mainfreight’s road fleet policy, agreed with our Owner
Drivers, limits vehicles to a maximum age of 10 years, with
an overall fleet average closer to six years. This stands in
contrast to national averages for heavy vehicles in New
Zealand, Australia, Europe, and the United States, which
range from 12 to 18 years. As a result, most of our fleet
meets the Euro VI emissions standard.
But newer vehicles don’t just look better - they perform
better. Fuel efficiency improves by roughly 1% with
each model year. This may seem small, but these gains
compound significantly across a large fleet, year after year.
Importantly, Euro VI vehicles also meet stringent emissions
standards for harmful pollutants like nitrogen oxides (NOx)
and particulate matter (PM), helping reduce air pollution in
the communities we operate.
Road trains are a long-haul truck configuration used in Australia. They consist of a prime mover
(tractor unit) towing multiple trailers, often three, sometimes more, and can extend beyond 50
metres in length, carrying over 100 tonnes of freight in a single trip.
Mainfreight now operates 37 road train units weekly, connecting a growing number of
locations across Australia.
These configurations allow us to move significantly more freight per trip. While total fuel use
increases, the efficiency is greatly improved on a per tonne-kilometre basis.
Reducing emissions in road transport will undoubtedly rely on new technologies, but some of the
most effective solutions are already available, albeit with less fanfare. Established modes such as rail,
coastal shipping and inland waterways can offer immediate and meaningful emissions reductions,
often in the range of 70% (when compared to traditional road freight).
Mainfreight has long invested in the interconnectivity between modes to support different
customer requirements and provide flexibility and accessibility across our network. This includes
built-in rail sidings at a number of our larger New Zealand sites, access to inland waterways through
key locations in Europe and various coastal connection points. Collectively, these allow us to reduce
emissions through more efficient transport modes while simultaneously mitigating heavy transport
congestion on key arterial road networks.
5Environmental

The EVs we have in our fleet fall into the following three classes
Electric Vehicles
Direct electrification is easily the most efficient energy system for road transportation (as measured
by energy return on energy invested). While some specialist applications will require alternative fuels,
electrification is expected to form the backbone of long term decarbonisation across the road freight
sec tor.
Heavy Electric Vehicle (HEV) adoption remains slow. High purchase prices, insurance costs, resale
uncertainty, vehicle mass and dimension rules and access to charging infrastructure remain constraints.
However, the rate of innovation in battery chemistry and technology is quickly overcoming both practical
and financial limitations.
We are optimistic about the outlook for electric vehicles in our fleet and although this transition will take
time, we are already investing in the renewable energy, battery storage and charging infrastructure to
support EVs.
Light Duty Trucks & Vans
Our light duty fleet includes the Mercedes eSprinter in the USA, Ford E-Transit and Fuso E-Canters
in New Zealand, and Foton iBlue/T5s and SEA 300-85s in Australia. Payloads range between
1,000kg to 4,500kg and up to six pallets.
Light duty vehicles perform a diverse range of roles in our fleet - from dedicated services for
individual customers, through to inner city deliveries with challenging access.
HVO Diesel
Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO) is a second-generation low-emission fuel, and a direct ‘drop-in’
alternative to conventional diesel. Unlike earlier biofuels, HVO can be used as a full replacement, or
blended with existing stock without modification, to vehicles or infrastructure. At 100% concentration,
it offers an emissions reduction of 80–90%.
Mainfreight has been using HVO at our own fuelling station in ‘s-Heerenberg, the Netherlands, with
over 100,000 litres supplied so far in 2026. As availability of alternative fuels continues to grow, we
are actively exploring how they can play a broader role in our road freight operations in Europe and
further afield.
Mainfreight is proud to be a member of the Smart Freight Centre, who are leading efforts to decarbonise
transport and logistics. In particular we support the following programmes:
·
The Global Logistics Emissions Council (GLEC) Framework
·
Clean Cargo
·
Clean Air Transport
For those that are interested, you can find details about the work of the Smart Freight Centre here:
www.smartfreightcentre.org/en/
Smart Freight Centre
Medium Duty Trucks
Operationally, medium duty vehicles make up the largest share of our fleet. These are our
pickup and delivery (PUD) vehicles that link customers into our wider domestic and international
networks.
Electrification in this segment is still developing. At present, our footprint is limited to two electric
conversions in New Zealand (12 and 14 pallet), both based on the Isuzu F-Series.
Over the medium to longer term this segment represents our biggest opportunity for EVs, with
more routine distances and working hours pairing effectively with overnight charging.
Heavy Duty Trucks
Our heavy duty fleet handles the long-haul work, moving freight between cities, and managing
heavier local tasks like port container collections.
EVs at this scale need substantial battery capacity, comparable to what might power a home for
a month. This brings practical trade-offs in weight, payload, and charging time that the industry
is still working through.
Despite this, we are already operating heavy-duty EVs in a number of markets, including:
·
XCMG E700 with battery swap, supporting local fulfilment in Auckland.
·
BYD 8TT tractor units for drayage out of Long Beach Port, Los Angeles.
·
MAN eTGXs for Zero Emission Zones in key European locations.
·
Volvo FMs supporting domestic and port operations in Europe.
Climate Change Waste Management Water Security6Environmental

Mainfreight’s Carbon Emissions Calculator, available through our Mainchain portal, is becoming an
increasingly valuable tool for customers looking to understand and manage the emissions impact
of their supply chain decisions.
Over the past year, engagement has grown as more customers use the calculator to test scenarios,
compare transport options, and model different configurations, whether that’s shifting modes,
adjusting routes, or changing packing assumptions. These insights allow customers to make more
informed trade-offs between operational needs and sustainability outcomes.
By embedding emissions data into everyday logistics decisions, the calculator helps our customers
balance cost, service, and carbon impact.
Carbon Emissions Calculator
Air and sea freight connect our customers to markets around the world, and are central to our service
offering. They also represent a significant share of our total emissions, with air freight accounting for
51%, and sea freight a further 12%.
Unfortunately, decarbonising these modes is notoriously difficult, especially for aviation. Both
electrification and green hydrogen are poor alternatives over the medium term. Electrification
has prohibitively high energy density demands, and green hydrogen has large volumetric storage
needs (or requires complex cryogenic tanks). These demands are consequential, not just to cost,
but in reduced potential payloads. As a result, alternate low emission fuels are likely the most viable
technology over the near term. In shipping, this includes methanol, ammonia and methane, often
called Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG). In aviation, the leading option is Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF).
SAF is a broad term covering a range of advanced fuels produced from different feedstocks, capable
of delivering emissions reductions in the range of 80%. In practice, SAF is typically blended with
conventional jet fuel, meaning the per-flight reduction is lower, but the cumulative impact grows as
supply scales and blend rates increase. The same scaling challenge applies across maritime fuels,
where production volumes and cost remain barriers to wider adoption. In both cases, it will be
important that growth in alternate fuels, and the associated feedstocks, does not come at the cost
of further deforestation or food insecurity.
In 2025, we launched our first SAF pilot project in collaboration with a partner airline and a
New Zealand based customer, applying a 20% SAF emissions reduction to a limited number of
shipments. Complexities in the reporting of market-based emissions reductions has resulted in
slower uptake than we would have liked. However, progress has been made, and these are now
being more widely recognised across international reporting standards and bodies. We hope
to expand the programme to new customers, lanes and fuels (including sustainable maritime
fuels) over the next year.
Sustainable Maritime & Aviation Fuels
Customer Emissions Reporting
Emissions reporting across the supply chain can be complex. A single shipment may move through
multiple countries, across several transit points, and involve a mix of transport modes, each
contributing differently to overall emissions.
Mainfreight continues to develop its emissions reporting capabilities to provide a clearer and more
consistent view of these impacts. Our tools analyse each stage of a shipment, combining activity
data with appropriate emission factors to produce detailed, shipment-level insights. Reporting
is available across land transport and international air and ocean movements, with additional
coverage now extended to wharf operations and warehousing.
These tools are designed to support transparency and consistency in emissions measurement.
Customers can view and analyse their data through dashboards, export results where needed, or
automate regular reporting to support internal tracking and disclosure requirements.
Establishing a reliable emissions baseline is an important step in understanding supply chain
impacts. From there, opportunities for improvement can be identified through changes in network
design, transport mode selection, and operational efficiencies, including the adoption of lower-
emission alternatives where available.
Climate Change Waste Management Water Security7Environmental

We take great pride in building state of the art facilities that not only support world class service to
our customers, but allow us to do so in a safe and sustainable way.
As standard, our branches incorporate efficient lighting and appliances, double glazing, electric
forklift charging, AC car charging, and DC fast charging for trucks. HVAC (Heating, Ventilation, and
Air Conditioning) and VRF (Variable Refrigerant Flow) with heat recovery and carbon monoxide
monitoring are also standard features. In addition, we operate advanced Building and Energy
Management Systems (BMS and EMS) to continuously monitor and optimise how our facilities are
performing.
With climate-related disruptions becoming more common, resilience is also built into our design.
Solar generation, battery storage, and on-site water capture and storage help us maintain
operations when local infrastructure or utilities are affected. There’s more to come, with over
NZ$174 million in new property development planned over the next year.
Our Facilities
Infrastructure
The shift to a low carbon economy relies heavily on the proliferation of cheap, renewable energy,
not just to displace fossil fuels, but to enable the electrification of transport, industry, and other
sectors.
This transition is also changing how energy systems are structured. Distributed energy resources
(DER); solar installations, battery storage, and demand management at both residential and
commercial scale are reducing dependence on large, centralised power supplies, and the costly
transmission and distribution networks that connect them. The more energy that is generated and
consumed locally, the less pressure on the grid, the lower the investment required in infrastructure,
and the more modular and resilient the system becomes overall.
This is about more than access to lower-cost electricity. As electrification accelerates across
industries, demand on the grid will become increasingly competitive. By generating our own power,
we reduce our load on local networks, avoid costly connection upgrades, and contribute to a more
distributed and resilient energy system.
Solar
As our portfolio of renewable energy assets grows, so does the opportunity to use them more intelligently.
We are increasingly looking beyond simple generation and consumption to explore how our energy
infrastructure can work harder, improving returns, reducing dependence, and supporting the broader
energy system.
Under a traditional retail electricity model, solar is consumed as it’s produced, and batteries take over
when the sun goes down. But when batteries are full, and panels continue generating, surplus power
is typically exported to the grid at relatively low feed-in tariffs. That’s energy we’ve produced but aren’t
getting full value from.
One alternative we are trialling is Virtual Energy Networks (VENs). VENs allow surplus solar from one
Mainfreight site to be credited against the consumption of another, a form of peer-to-peer energy sharing
across our own network. Five branches along Australia’s east coast are currently trialling VENs, with plans
to expand.
We are also participating in Frequency Control Ancillary Services (FCAS), using our battery systems to
respond to real-time fluctuations in grid supply and demand. This is a form of energy arbitrage, using
smart systems and market mechanisms to trade stored energy at higher-value periods, generating returns
while helping stabilise the local grid.
New Energy Solutions
For Mainfreight, rooftop solar is now standard on new owned buildings. Our facilities are also
designed to accommodate further expansion as energy demands grow, particularly through
the electrification of our fleet. Across our international operations, installed solar capacity now
exceeds 12.0MW, enough to power over 2,500 homes, and capable of supplying close to 17%
of our total electricity consumption.
Climate Change Waste Management Water Security8Environmental

Supply chains and logistics don’t run on a nine to five schedule, and the sun isn’t always shining
when our operations are at their busiest. Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) help us bridge
that gap, capturing excess solar energy generated during the day, and making it available when we
need it most.
The benefits extend beyond better use of our solar assets. BESS helps manage exposure to peak
electricity pricing and provides a buffer against grid disruptions, allowing us to maintain operations
and keep freight moving when it matters. Across our network, we currently have over 11.8MWh
of battery storage installed.
As the technology matures, and costs continue to come down, we expect BESS to become an
increasingly common part of how our facilities operate.
Battery Energy Storage Systems
Charging infrastructure is now embedded across our network, with 71% of owned branches
equipped with charging facilities. This ranges from AC charging in our carparks for small fleet
vehicles, through to forklift charging on dock and in warehouses, and DC fast charging for our heavy
EV fleet.
As our fleet electrifies, the scale and sophistication of this infrastructure is growing. Our new
Willawong facility in Queensland, Australia, is our most advanced charging hub to date. Supported
by on-site solar and battery storage, Willawong includes 480kW of on-dock fast charging, a further
480kW multi-vehicle charging station, and eight 22kW AC chargers for smaller fleet vehicles.
Facilities like Willawong point to where the future is heading. As smart charging infrastructure,
renewables, and battery storage come together at our sites, our branches will perform
multifunctional roles as both freight hubs and energy stations.
EV Chargers & Charging Hubs
As a large and growing energy user, we recognise that an effective energy strategy requires more
than physical infrastructure, it also depends on the digital systems that enable us to optimise
performance.
Energy Management Systems (EMS) form the nerve centre of a building, capturing and translating
real-time energy consumption data into meaningful, actionable insights.
We have now implemented EMS across several major branches in New Zealand, Australia and the
United States. These systems provide a range of capabilities, including:
·
Optimising energy use through digital platforms and dashboards with real-time monitoring.
·
Managing grid interactions, including demand response and load shifting.
·
Providing visibility of how diverse subsystems interact, enabling effective management of
competing energy demands.
·
Generating early fault alerts to enable timely maintenance and reduce the risk of escalation.
·
Using trend analysis to identify efficiency opportunities and validate the impact of interventions.
·
Evaluating the performance of energy assets to inform future design and investment decisions.
·
Benchmarking performance across sites to support shared learning and continuous
improvement.
As our energy requirements continue to grow, these systems will play an increasingly critical role
in improving efficiency, reducing operating costs, mitigating the risk of faults and outages, and
ensuring energy is available where and when it is needed most.
Energy Management Systems
Operations
Climate Change Waste Management Water Security9Environmental

Our Material Handling Equipment (MHE) represents our most
progressed fleet transition to date, now at over 89% electric.
The shift has been driven by more than just emissions, electric
MHE are simpler to maintain, quieter to operate, and improve
air quality in enclosed environments like warehouses.
It’s a practical example of where sustainability and operational
performance align, making electric MHE a straightforward
choice where operational conditions allow.
Stretch wrap continues to play  an important role  in  logistics,
helping secure palletised freight for safe transport and storage.
However, it is typically a single-use soft plastic that has historically
ended up in landfill after use. 
Mainfreight is actively working to reduce this impact by partnering
with organisations across multiple regions to recover used
stretch wrap and return it to the production cycle. Alongside this,
we are collaborating with customers and suppliers to optimise
packaging practices, including opportunities to reduce wrap
usage where feasible. While not yet a fully circular solution, these
initiatives represent meaningful progress in lowering our reliance
on virgin plastic, and improving the sustainability of our operations.
Mainfreight’s in-branch canteens provide fresh, nutritious meals
for our teams, but also generate a consistent stream of food waste,
which managed well, can be repurposed rather than discarded.
This organic material, combined with waste from our on site
gardens, is processed through worm farms at several locations,
producing nutrient-rich castings and liquid fertiliser. These outputs
are used to support our vegetable and herb gardens, helping to
grow fresh produce that is fed back into our canteens.
This circular approach reduces landfill waste, supports local food
production, and encourages team engagement with sustainability
initiatives. While simple in concept, it reflects our broader
commitment to embedding circular thinking into our day-to-day
operations.
In Australia, we have introduced the Terberg Electric
Terminal Tractor (also called a ‘tug’) as a further means to
reduce emissions in our operations. We now have four of
these in operation, with two further tugs on order for our
Willawong site once fully operational.
Like our MHE, tugs can operate in enclosed environments,
so electrification supports both lower emissions and
improved air quality for our team.
Our small vehicle fleet keeps our sales and support teams
connected to customers and partners across the network. This
year, hybrid and electric vehicles make up 62% of that fleet,
up from 54% in 2025.
We continue to see opportunity for improvement in this
area, and have been actively rolling out further EV charging
to support greater proportions of plug-in vehicles within our
small fleet.
Electrical Material
Handling Equipment
Soft Plastic Recycling
Composting & Team Gardens
Electric Terminal Tractors
Small Vehicle Fleet
Reducing our Impact
Environmental10Climate Change Waste Management Water Security

Supporting Circularity
Enabling more circular supply chains relies on the development of effective reverse logistics systems that support the return, recovery
and repurposing of goods once they reach the end of their initial use. By extending product lifecycles, these solutions help reduce
waste, conserve resources, lower energy demand and avoid additional embodied emissions.
Transitioning to these models is complex. Many supply chains have been built around linear, one-way movement, and shifting to
circularity requires alignment across logistics, product design, regulation and customer behaviour. Despite these challenges, growing
resource constraints, and increasing interest in sustainable practices are driving greater demand for reverse logistics solutions.
At Mainfreight, we have long supported customers with reverse logistics as part of our wider supply chain offering – facilitating returns,
managing waste streams, and identifying opportunities to recover value from end-of-life goods. We continue to work alongside our
customers and partners to develop practical, scalable solutions that fit within existing operations while supporting better outcomes.
Ultimately, our focus is on helping redefine what “end-of-life” looks like, creating pathways to keep materials and products in use for
longer, and reducing our impact on the environment.
Reverse Logistics
Our Mainfreight 2Home division provides transportation,
delivery, and installation services for homeware, furniture and
appliances. As part of this, we also remove old appliances and
manage associated packaging waste, including bulky materials
such as cardboard and polystyrene.
Polystyrene is particularly challenging due to its light weight
and high volume, making it inefficient to handle and dispose
of. At our 2Home branches in Auckland and Christchurch
we address this by using on site compacting machines that
compress polystyrene to up to 40 times its original density.
This process significantly reduces storage and transport
requirements, while also creating a material that can be
repurposed in the production of new goods. Thereby diverting
waste from landfill and supporting reduction in the use of virgin
materials.
Polystyrene Compression
We’ve installed baling machines at some larger sites to compact cardboard and plastic waste, delivering both operational and
environmental benefits. By reducing the space taken up by loose waste, we keep our sites tidier and more efficient. In addition, neatly
compacted materials can often be sold for reuse in manufacturing, reducing demand for raw materials and allowing us to earn a small
return, rather than incur disposal costs.
Plastic & Cardboard Baling Machines
Climate Change Waste Management Water Security11Environmental11Environmental

Rainwater is a valuable, yet often underutilised resource,
frequently lost to evaporation or diverted directly into
stormwater systems.
At Mainfreight, we take a different approach. Across
our branches, rainwater collected from roof spans is
captured, stored in on site tanks, and repurposed for
uses such as ablutions and garden irrigation. More
recently, it has also been filtered for potable use in
selected locations.
Our focus on rainwater capture and retention has deep
roots, dating back to our early days with a second-hand
farm tank. Today, rainwater storage is a standard feature
across our network, with millions of litres of storage
capacity, supporting our operations and reducing
reliance on mains water supply. In total, our branches
now have over 14 million litres in on site storage.
In many facilities, greywater, used water from sinks, showers,
and similar sources, is typically discharged directly into
wastewater systems, contributing to overall water utility costs.
At Mainfreight, we adopt a more resource-efficient approach.
Rather than treating greywater as waste, we seek opportunities
to extend its usefulness. Where feasible, greywater is captured,
treated, and reused for non-potable applications, such as truck
washing and irrigation through sprinkler systems.
By repurposing greywater in this way, we reduce reliance
on mains water while helping to lessen demand on local
wastewater infrastructure.
Mainfreight manages a diverse range of freight, including
dangerous goods (DGs), particularly through our specialist
chemical logistics division, Chemcouriers. We are entrusted to
transport and handle these materials responsibly, minimising
potential risks to people, ecosystems and watercourses.
Our approach is underpinned by purpose-built facilities,
specialised equipment, and comprehensive training and
certification for our operations teams and drivers. Together,
these elements ensure we have robust systems in place to
manage dangerous goods safely and respond effectively to
potential incidents, including spills or emergencies.
Mainfreight is a member and supporter of Responsible Care
through our Chemcouriers brand in New Zealand and Australia.
Responsible Care works to establish and share best practice in
safety, health and environmental protection, particularly safe
chemical management.
Many Mainfreight warehousing sites store substances that
have the potential to cause environmental harm, particularly if
released into sensitive receptors such as streams, mangroves,
and wetlands.
To mitigate these risks, we implement multiple layers of
engineered controls, including staged secondary and tertiary
containment systems. Our specialised dangerous goods storage
facility in Auckland is a leading example of this approach. It
features hazardous substance containment capacity exceeding
one million litres, profiled flooring with recessed bunding, and
dedicated holding tanks for incompatible substances.
Beyond the facility itself, site design also plays a critical role.
Yard areas are contoured to direct flow towards dry sumps,
supported by stormwater gate valve systems that provide a
final layer of protection. Together, these measures help ensure
that any potential spills are effectively contained and prevented
from entering the environment.
Rainwater
GreywaterResponsible Care
Spill Prevention Measures
Water ResourcesWater Systems
Climate Change Waste Management Water Security12Environmental

Social
Community
Te a mPeople in the Value Chain
Partnerships
Involvement
Health, Safety & Wellness
Opportunity & Development
Diversity & Inclusivity
Sustainable Procurement
Mainfreight’s connection to local communities and community
groups has been an important part of our journey from the
very beginning, anchored in the values of our Three Pillars
(see page 2). Communities provide the people who power our
operations, the customers who choose and trust our services,
and the investors who believe in our long term vision.
Their contribution is not only critical to our success, but also
shapes who we are and how we operate. In return, we are
committed to making a meaningful and lasting contribution
to the communities we serve. As we grow and expand into
new regions, we do so with a strong sense of responsibility
to support local initiatives, create new opportunities, and
develop the connections that make our business possible.
Our people are at the heart of everything we do. Our motto,
“Special People, Special Company,” reflects our belief that
everything we accomplish begins with our team.
There is no more important investment for us than creating
the conditions in which our people can thrive. This begins
with a strong commitment to health, safety, and wellbeing,
and attracting diverse talent and perspectives. We also
offer a broad range of development pathways designed
to meet the varied career aspirations of our team, ensuring
that talent is supported at every level of the organisation.
Mainfreight has always taken pride in maintaining transparency
and an honest approach to communication, whether with
our team, customers, or the wider market. Where regulatory
obligations apply, we have always sought to meet and exceed
these expectations.
We currently operate under modern slavery legislation in
multiple jurisdictions, and publish Modern Slavery Statements
aligned with those requirements. However, recent legislative
developments and growing public interest, have advanced
and extend beyond the reaches of internal operations, to the
wider value chain.
As a service-based business, we are not significant procurers
of upstream materials, and our value chain is comparatively
limited. Nevertheless, we recognise that we can do more, and
exercise greater due diligence to ensure that no labour or
human rights violations exist throughout our value chain.
13Social

Mainfreight has proudly supported the Duffy Books in Homes
programme since its inception in 1994. We have focused
on helping to break the cycle of booklessness by ensuring
children can choose, own and enjoy brand new books to
foster a lifelong love of books and reading. In recent years,
Mainfreight has helped more than 25,000 children annually to
access new books in New Zealand. From January to December
2025, this support saw 48,594 books being delivered to
children. Our support also extends to Books in Homes schools
across Australia and USA. Today, the Duffy programme
reaches 551 schools in New Zealand, with 77% of high-equity
schools matched to a committed funding partner. These
partnerships are essential to supporting the children, whānau
and communities that need it most, ensuring access to books
and positive reading experiences remain strong.
We encourage more New Zealand businesses
to be part of this programme. By scanning
the QR code alongside, organisations can
find a school seeking support, and consider
supporting them to help strengthen literacy,
learning and community wellbeing where it
matters most.
Mainfreight has had a close relationship with Bairds
Mainfreight Primary School in Ōtara, Auckland since 1993,
forming one of our longest-standing and most meaningful
community relationships. What began as a small donation to
support school sports has grown into a long term partnership
focused on education, opportunity, and shared commitment.
Over the years, our support has included investments in
technology and equipment, with early contributions helping
equip every classroom with computers, alongside ongoing
upgrades. More recently, a lockable container for storage
of school bikes has been donated. We have also supported
a range of school initiatives and remain actively engaged
with the school community through regular attendance at
assemblies and events.
A highlight of the partnership is the annual visit to Waiheke
Island, hosted by Bruce Plested, where students experience
farm and island life. Scholarships are also awarded to selected
students to support their progression through high school
and into tertiary education. These are awarded annually for
a period of three years, providing standards and criteria are
met.
This relationship is built on mutual contribution, with the
school actively working alongside us to maximise the impact
of our support. We are proud to continue playing a role in
creating opportunities for students and supporting their
learning journey.
Life Education Trust is a charity made up of 32 regional trusts
across New Zealand. They are the largest health education
provider in schools, and have been teaching children to
embrace healthy choices for over 38 years. Mainfreight has
been a partner for the last 18 years. Along with their mascot
Harold the Giraffe, their team of 45 registered teachers
educate children about their body, relationships and
communities, identity and resilience, food and nutrition,
and helpful and harmful substances.
The Healthy Harold programme reaches 86% of all primary
and intermediate schools in New Zealand – teaching about
250,000 tamariki (children) and rangatahi (youths) each year.
Recently their work has broadened to include professional
development programmes for teachers – a ‘coach the
coaches’ approach. More than 2,000 teachers each year
are taking part in programmes to upskill their professional
teaching strategies, supported by Life Education Trust.
Partnerships
Bairds
Mainfreight
Primary
Community Team People in the Value Chain14Social

Involvement
Our Utrecht branch in the Netherlands is home to one
of the largest permanent ‘insect hotels’ in Europe,
setting a benchmark for how our sites can support local
biodiversity. Several of our other European branches
have also introduced bee hotels, creating safe habitats
for pollinators within our operational footprint.
Bees play a critical role in healthy ecosystems,
supporting pollination of wildflowers, local gardens, and
surrounding agricultural land. By providing habitat, we
contribute to strengthening these natural systems.
Mainfreight’s IDEA Days (Intellectual Disability Empowerment
in Action) are a favourite annual event at several of our New
Zealand branches. These days are dedicated to welcoming our
special guests, along with their caregivers, to enjoy a day of
fun, connection, and celebration with our team. This includes
truck and muscle car rides, along with regular participation
from the New Zealand Police and Fire Service and, of course,
the traditional Mainfreight BBQ. Many of our branches
have long standing relationships with their local IHC. Find
out more about the wonderful work done by the IHC here:
www.ihc.org.nz
Our people are an active and competitive bunch, and we
channel that energy into supporting causes that matter. Over
the past year, teams across our network have backed a wide
range of initiatives including:
·
Herald Sun Run for The Kids – Melbourne, supporting the
Royal Children’s Hospital
·
Poland Business Run – Warsaw, supporting people with
mobility challenges
·
Revo Fitness 24hr Swim for Ocean Heroes – Sydney,
supporting the neurodiverse community
·
24-Hour Spin Bike Challenge – Sydney, supporting the
Police Legacy Charity
·
Relay for Life – Albury, supporting the Cancer Council
·
Children’s Welfare Market – Shanghai, supporting the
Shanghai Children’s Foundation
·
Stride for a cure 10km race – Hong Kong, supporting the
Children Cancer Foundation
·
Run for Mom – Thailand, supporting the Thai Red Cross
Society
Beyond events, you can find our team volunteering at
foodbanks and supporting food drives across Toronto, San
Diego, Leicester, Sydney and Whanganui and at animal shelters
and sanctuaries in Wellington, Palmerston North, Thailand and
San Francisco.
Whether it’s running, riding, volunteering, or simply showing
up, our people consistently find ways to contribute to our
communities.
We’re proud to operate in some of the most diverse and beautiful environments around the world, and where we are able, we take an
active role in helping to protect them.
Over the past year, our teams have supported a range of local initiatives, from tree planting in Qingdao, Hamilton, Christchurch and
Atlanta to clean-up efforts across beaches in Auckland, Tauranga and Singapore, and rivers and community gardens in Detroit, Rotorua
and ‘s-Heerenberg.
While each activity may seem small on its own, collectively they reflect our culture of care and responsibility when it comes to our
communities. We may be an international company, but we’re also locals.
Bee & Insect Hotels
Mainfreight IDEA Days
Community in Action
Rolling up our Sleeves
SocialCommunity Team People in the Value Chain15

Health, Safety & Wellness
A safe working environment starts with the people in it. At Mainfreight, safety is a shared
responsibility, owned by every team member, at every level. It’s also reflected in the quality of our
facilities and equipment, the strength of our processes, and a culture that actively encourages input
and ownership across the business.
Our approach centres on education, risk awareness, and personal responsibility. We want our
people to feel confident acting safely and speaking up, recognising that a strong safety culture is
built through everyday behaviour, not just policy.
Incidents and accidents are systematically recorded and reported, supporting continuous
improvement and transparency. Positive Action Team (PAT) meetings are held regularly across our
operations to surface concerns, identify hazards and put practical solutions in place.
We also look for ways to keep safety thinking fresh. Initiatives like Safety Week and team-based
safety challenges encourage our people to think creatively and collaboratively about how we can
continue to improve.
The Health & Safety Lens
Our Health & Safety Initiatives
MitigateInvolveTr ain
MaintainSupport
Initiatives to help mitigate
health and safety risks at our
sites as well as when we deal
with the community.
How we involve all people to
be a part of our health and
safety initiatives.
How we train our teams to
understand and behave in
accordance with our health
and safety standards.
What we do to maintain
engagement and standards
for health and safety.
How we support our teams to
ensure they stay healthy and
get back to work quickly.
Forklift Monitoring & Safety Systems
Forklifts are an essential part of our operations, but they are also one of the most common sources
of safety risk in any logistics environment. Getting this right comes down to well trained people,
well defined processes and smart technology. We have rolled out advanced forklift monitoring
and safety systems across our operations, combining fleet management tools with practical safety
features, these include:
·
Pre-Shift Inspections: Operators complete a safety checklist at login before each shift, with a
second check triggered at changeover.
·
Driver Behaviour Monitoring: Online platforms track metrics such as speed, heavy braking,
and sharp turns by each operator. These insights allow us to identify trends, promote
accountability, and share learnings across the team.
·
Fleet Performance Analytics: Online platforms provide real-time data to support smarter fleet
management, including:
·
Peak usage by day of week and time of day
·
Utilisation insights to guide right-sizing of the fleet
·
Tracking of runtime and downtime by equipment type to identify underused assets or
bottlenecks.
·
Remote Configuration: Speed limits and other equipment settings can be updated remotely,
enabling rapid implementation of new safety features or operational policies.
·
Halo System: The Halo system projects blue light around the operating area of a forklift,
simulating a safety zone that is clear to any team working nearby.
·
Body Guard: The Body Guard is a tag held by team on foot that gives an alert when operating
forklifts are in close proximity. A similar alert is also activated on the forklift to notify the
operator of a team member in their vicinity.
These systems, alongside effective training and a safety culture, provide real-time visibility, better
data, and practical tools that help keep our people safe.
Community Team People in the Value Chain16Social

Forklift Safety Awareness Month has become one of our most engaging safety initiatives. First launched
in New Zealand in 2025, the campaign runs over four weeks and features a safety leaderboard, forklift
driving competition with regional and national finals, a “Forklift Roadcode” quiz, and a creative photo
competition, all centred on forklift safety awareness.
The response has been strong. The driving competition and quiz have proven particularly popular, with
the quiz completed by over 1,000 team members. Encouragingly, we have seen improved reporting of
forklift-related incidents, and a shift in the balance from accidents to near misses, a clear sign of growing
awareness and a more proactive safety culture.
Complementary initiatives such as “Stop the Drop”, focused on preventing falling freight, have further
reinforced engagement across the business. Australia now runs Forklift Safety Awareness Month alongside
New Zealand, and other Mainfreight regions are exploring ways to introduce their own campaigns.
Building on this momentum, we have also introduced a Manual Handling Safety Week under our “Lift
Smart Not Hard” campaign, extending the same hands-on, team-driven approach to one of the most
common sources of workplace injury.
Fatigue and distraction remain among the leading causes of accidents
in the road transport industry. At Mainfreight, we are committed to
protecting our team, our Owner Drivers, and the public by adopting
the best tools available, including cutting-edge technology.
In Australia and New Zealand, we use Guardian by AutoSense, a driver
monitoring system that tracks facial movement and gaze to detect
early signs of fatigue or distraction. In-cab cameras monitor head
position and eye activity in real time, triggering an immediate audio
alarm and seat vibration when safety thresholds are breached.
Guardian also includes a forward-facing camera that captures road
footage at the time of an event. When an incident is detected, data
and video are transmitted instantly to the 24/7 Guardian Centre,
which alerts the relevant Mainfreight team for real-time intervention
and follow-up.
This gives our branches the ability to respond immediately to high-
risk events and to track emerging patterns across their fleets over
time. In our European operations, a separate fatigue management
solution is in place, tailored to the region’s regulatory and operational
requirements.
We want our people to feel supported, both inside and outside of
work. Our Team Wellbeing Programme provides free, confidential
counselling and support services to team members, Owner Drivers,
and their families.
The programme is delivered through a network of trusted local
providers across our regions, connecting people with qualified
professionals when they need them. Support covers a broad range
of personal challenges, including relationship and family issues,
financial stress, gambling concerns, mental health difficulties,
trauma, and substance-related problems.
The aim is straightforward: to make sure everyone in the Mainfreight
family has access to the support they need, when they need it.
Eating together every day is a Mainfreight tradition, and a reflection
of the values behind our Three Pillars. Our in-branch canteens serve
hot, healthy meals prepared by in-house chefs and offered at heavily
subsidised rates, bringing people together across every level of the
business.
Electronic logbooks are another important part of how we manage
driver safety and fatigue. They provide a clear, real-time record of
work and rest hours – removing ambiguity and allowing rest breaks to
be planned safely and efficiently.
Safety Campaigns
Fatigue Protection Devices
Team Wellbeing Programme
Canteens
Electronic Logbooks
SocialCommunity Team People in the Value Chain17

Opportunity
& Development
Parental Support
Across our Network
We are committed to supporting our team through the
journey of parenthood, and have implemented a Group
Parental Leave Scheme, adapted to local conditions as
required.
Primary carers receive up to 26 weeks of paid parental leave
at full salary, followed by up to 26 weeks of childcare support
once they return to work. This structure provides support
across a 12-month period, with no repayment conditions if a
team member chooses not to return.
Flexible working arrangements and involvement in
development or promotion discussions are considered case
by case.
Although regional entitlements vary, our intent is the same:
to support team members in growing their families without
having to step back from their careers.
Team Family Scholarships
The value of education has a long history at Mainfreight and
extends beyond the walls of our branches. The Mainfreight
Scholarship Programme is a long-standing initiative supporting
the children of team members and Owner Drivers across New
Zealand and Australia, with over 425 recipients since it was
established.
In 2024, we expanded the programme to include trade
qualifications alongside university and tertiary study, reflecting
our belief that education takes many forms and all career paths
deserve support.
Each scholarship provides $4,000 per year for up to three
years, totalling $12,000 per student. Whether the goal is
law, engineering, nursing, a trade, or even commercial pilot
training, the programme helps turn ambition into opportunity.
Maintrain
Education may be optional, but learning is compulsory, it’s a
belief that runs throughout our company. Our online Learning
Management System (LMS) puts that into practice, giving team
members the ability to access training materials, enrol in courses,
and track their own development.
Beyond individual learning, the platform supports the efficient
rollout of training programmes across the business and helps
ensure compliance with local regulatory requirements, all while
reinforcing the culture of continuous learning that sits at the heart
of Mainfreight.
Community Team People in the Value Chain18Social

Share in the Profits
Any business is expected to focus on generating returns, but
how those rewards are shared says more about its culture.
At Mainfreight, we believe the people who contribute to our
results should share in them.
In 2026, Mainfreight reported a profit before tax of NZ$350.9
million. While this result sits below previous years following
a challenging period, our commitment to sharing success with
the team has not changed.
This year, NZ$46.3 million in bonuses will be distributed to
team members in regions that achieved their performance
targets.
Mainfreight Development Programme
Every region we operate in runs a team development
programme, each with the same goal: to produce
Mainfreight’s future leaders. Candidates start on the floor in
a branch, earning their stripes, learning the operation from
the ground up, and building experience that will serve them
throughout their career. Alongside this, they are supported
with personal development tools, networking opportunities,
and formal training to help them grow into roles of greater
responsibility.
Mainfreight Induction Programme
Our induction programme is a rite of passage for all full-time
team members. It covers our history, our philosophies, and the
key principles and processes that help new team members hit the
ground running.
Training Programmes
Investing in our people is one of the most important things
we do. We combine hands-on, on-the-job learning with
structured training programmes that cover induction,
operations, personal development, leadership, and systems
capability. A few of the key programmes include:
Promote From Within
Few things define Mainfreight’s culture more than our
commitment to promoting from within. It places responsibility
on our leaders to develop their own successors, and creates
clear pathways for team members, regardless of background,
to progress through the business, to all levels of leadership.
Many of our current leaders are a testament to this, with careers
measured not in years, but in decades.
Main Divide
Main Divide is a special programme created in 2018 with the intent
to identify and develop those pivotal team members who set the
tone for what great looks like on our operational floor. They are
quiet achievers who live and breathe our culture and the ones our
team turn to when times are tough.
The programme is a 6-day experience where our team navigate
their way across New Zealand’s Southern Alps. Most are completely
taken out of their comfort zones; from hiking across open river
beds and rugged snow-covered mountaintops to tackling class 3-4
rapids on the Landsborough River.
Leadership Development Training
Mainfreight has a long history of developing both emerging
and experienced leaders through dedicated leadership
programmes. These focus on self-development, leadership,
and team dynamics, and are delivered through a mix of
internal and external providers.
Outward Bound
For over 20 years, we have partnered with Outward Bound
to deliver a tailored nine-day leadership and personal
development programme. Each year, up to four groups of
Mainfreighters from around the world are selected for a
challenging week in New Zealand’s stunning Marlborough
Sounds. Outward Bound remains a formative and fond
memory for many of our senior leaders.
Each of our regions has its own specialist Training and Development team, supported by purpose-built facilities designed for hands-on
learning.
These teams deliver a broad range of internal training, from inductions and technical guidance on new systems through to change
management support and internal operational audits. Their role is to keep our people well equipped and our operations at their best.
Just as importantly, our Training and Development teams are the guardians of our culture. They play a central role not just in onboarding
new team members but in maintaining and reinforcing the values of our Three Pillars across the business.
Dedicated Training and Development Team Facilities
Community Team People in the Value Chain19Social

Mainfreight is committed to diversity and inclusivity in all areas of its operations, and the Group’s
Diversity Policy is available on our website at the link below.
www.mainfreight.com/global/en-nz/investor/corporate-governance/diversity-policy
We recognise and value the differences in experience and perspective from all the groups that
make up our team. This includes, but is not limited to, different ethnicities, cultural backgrounds,
age, abilities, family status, religious beliefs, sexual orientation and gender identities. As a large
company operating in 27 countries, we are proud of the diverse individuals that make up our
wonderful team. However, we also acknowledge that, at least in respect to gender, there is more we
can do in an industry that has been historically male dominated.
We currently have 72 female managers (in roles with Profit & Loss responsibility). The number of key
management roles held by females still falls well below our expectations, and we continue to look
for improvement.
Diversity & Inclusivity
Sustainable Procurement
20162017201820192020202120222023202420252026
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
67
72
73
63
54
5353
46
37
31
27
Total Team Gender Ratios
This YearL a s t Yea r
CountryMaleFemaleMaleFemale
New Zealand78%22%78%22%
Australia73%27%72%28%
Europe72%28%75%25%
Americas67%33%59%41%
Asia38%62%39%61%
Total Group72%28%70%30%
Sustainable procurement is an important and well-established part of how we engage with our
partners and suppliers. By making informed and responsible purchasing decisions, we support a
healthier environment, a fairer society, and a more resilient economy.
Where possible, we prioritise purchasing products and services that have a reduced environmental
impact. This includes sourcing materials responsibly, prioritising the use of renewable energy,
reducing carbon emissions, conserving natural resources, minimising waste, and embracing eco-
friendly solutions throughout our operations.
We assess and consider suppliers based on their environmental practices and ethics. We expect
that our partners adhere to appropriate labour practices, including fair wages, safe working
conditions and the prohibition of child labour. In addition, we value partners who actively seek
feedback, conduct regular self-assessments, and engage collaboratively with stakeholders to drive
meaningful improvements.
By building long term relationships with suppliers who share our commitment to sustainability, we
reduce environmental and social risks across our value chain, while fostering enduring, trusted
partnerships. These strong mutual relationships help to ensure we hold each other accountable to
meeting the highest industry standards and continuously adopting best practices.
Community Team People in the Value Chain20Social

Governance
Reporting & DisclosureCorporate Governance Resources
Sustainability reporting plays an important role in ensuring transparency and comparability and
helping stakeholders distinguish genuine progress from greenwashing. As the landscape continues
to evolve, a growing number of standards, frameworks, and protocols have emerged globally, each
with different areas of emphasis depending on region, stakeholder expectations, or industry focus.
Below, we outline two core reporting and disclosure frameworks. Alongside these, we contribute to
a number of voluntary and investor-led sustainability initiatives.
We are also pleased to present in the section that follows, our climate report aligned with the
Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards.
To ensure consistency with global standards and mandatory reporting schemes we have changed
our greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions measurement standard from ISO 14064-1:2018 to the GHG
Protocol for 2026 FY. Our GHG inventory covers material Scope 1, 2 and 3 emissions.
You can find Mainfreight’s previous Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventory Reports dating from 2018
to 2025 on our website.
www.mainfreight.com/global/en-nz/investor/reports-library/sustainability-information
The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is one of the most widely recognised and adopted sustainability
reporting standards worldwide. Mainfreight has reported with reference to GRI since 2020. This
year, our GRI Disclosures and Context Index can be found at the end of this report. To learn more
about GRI, visit: www.globalreporting.org
www.mainfreight.com/global/en-nz/investor/reports-library
Here you can find our:
·
Mainfreight Annual Reports
·
Mainfreight Team Newsletters and trading updates
www.mainfreight.com/global/en-nz/investor/reports-library/sustainability-information
Here you can find our:
·
Mainfreight Sustainability & Climate Reports
·
Past Mainfreight GHG Inventory Reports
www.mainfreight.com/global/en-nz/investor/corporate-governance
Here you can find our:
·
Mainfreight Board and Committee Charters
·
Mainfreight Diversity Policy
·
Mainfreight Whistle Blower Policy
·
Mainfreight Guidelines for Anti-Corruption
·
Other policies
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting
GRI – Global Reporting Initiative
Mainfreight Investor Reports
Mainfreight Investor Reports – Sustainability Information
Mainfreight Corporate Governance
21Governance

We welcome the opportunity to present our 2026 Climate-
related Disclosures report, written in accordance with the
Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards (NZCS) and informed
by the Taskforce on Climate-related Financial Disclosures
(TCFD) and the Australian Accounting Standards Board
Climate-related Disclosures (AASB S2). This report reflects
the development of our climate reporting to meet evolving
international reporting regulations, and to better serve the
interests and needs of this report’s primary users.
Planned improvements, paired with feedback from
stakeholders have contributed to the following changes and
improvements made in this year’s report:
·
NZ CS 2 Adoption Provisions 5, 6 and 7 are no longer
applied
·
Change in our Greenhouse Gas (GHG) measurement
standard from ISO 14064-1:2018 to GHG Protocol.
·
Change in our audit partner and levels of assurance
(see page 50)
·
Updated financial analysis of physical risks and presentation
of gross and net impact
·
Consolidation and first financial analysis of transition risks
and opportunities
All references to “dollars” or “$” throughout this report are New
Zealand dollars, unless otherwise specified.
In support of the NZCS principles of Understandability and
Coherence (NZ CS 3), we have included an NZCS 1 Content
Index on page 52 of this report. TCFD and Global Reporting
Initiative (GRI) Content Indexes are also included for the benefit
of other readers on pages 53 and 54 respectively.
This Climate Statement was approved on behalf of the board
on the 30 June 2026.
Climate-related
Disclosure
Report
22
23
25
27
41
46
50
52
53
Introduction
Governance
Risk Management
Strategy
Metrics & Targets
Additional Information
Assurance Report
NZ CS1 Content Index
TCFD Content Index
Introduction
Don Braid
Managing Director
Bruce Plested
Chairman
Climate-related Disclosure Report22

Statement of Compliance
Mainfreight Limited, together with its subsidiaries and controlled entities, collectively the ‘Mainfreight
Group’ (referred to throughout this report as ‘Mainfreight’, ‘we’, ‘the company’, ‘the business’ or ‘the
Group’) is a Climate Reporting Entity (CRE) under the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 (the Act).
The following report, which constitutes our Climate Statement in accordance with the Act, covers the
period 1 April 2025 – 31 March 2026 (2026FY). The statements and disclosures provided are compliant
with the Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards issued by the External Reporting Board (XRB).
None of the adoption provisions provided within the standard (NZ CS2) have been used or applied in
this reporting period.
Compliance with Other Frameworks:
The California Climate-Related Financial Risk Act (CRFRA) requires large corporate entities ‘doing
business’ in the state to disclose climate-related financial risk and mitigation responses by 1 January
2026. This report represents Mainfreight’s second disclosure with respect to the CRFRA.
The California Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act (CCDAA) requires large corporate entities
‘doing business’ in the state to disclose greenhouse gas emissions in conformance with the GHG
Protocol by 10 August 2026. This report represents Mainfreight’s disclosure with respect to the CCDAA.
The Mainfreight Group Board of Directors (the Board) is responsible for the proper direction and control
of the Group’s activities. This includes oversight of the identification and control of the Group’s risks,
including climate-related risks. These responsibilities are reflected in the Board Charter, which does
not distinguish between risk classes and applies consistent oversight and scrutiny to all material risks.
The Board does not assess or distinguish skills specific to climate-related risks and opportunities
separately from those required for the management of business risks more broadly. The knowledge,
skills and experience required to oversee climate-related matters are considered part of the established
governance competencies the Board is committed to ensuring are represented in its composition, in
order to deliver on the Company’s goals and strategies. Ongoing education, covering the Company’s
business, together with any changes in corporate conduct and legal compliance, ensures that Directors
remain equipped to provide effective oversight of climate-related risks, opportunities and associated
disclosures.
The Audit Committee, established by the Board, is responsible for ensuring that the company has an
effective risk control framework in place for:
·
Safeguarding company assets (including
appropriate insurance cover and other
mitigation).
·
Maintenance of proper accounting and
business records.
·
Compliance with legislation.
·
Ensuring reliability of financial information.
·
Maintaining an overview of business risk factors
and establishing the means of mitigating these.
Climate risk modelling and additional information are provided by the Group Sustainability and Group
Finance teams to the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) in support of the Audit Committee. The Audit
Committee meets annually to set and/or monitor progress against climate-related metrics and targets,
and to address material and unmitigated risks, with findings and recommendations made to the Board.
The Board, supported by the Audit Committee and Management, takes climate-related risks and
opportunities into account as part of its oversight of the Group’s strategy, including major transactions
and risk management processes.
Climate-related considerations are reviewed and weighed alongside other strategic, financial and
operational factors to support informed decision-making, including with respect to different time
horizons. The Board recognises that such considerations will involve trade-offs and uncertainties that
are assessed in the context of the Group’s overall objectives and risk appetite.
Remuneration policies do not directly consider performance against climate metrics and targets.
The Board delegates the conduct of the day-to-day affairs of the company to the Group Managing
Director and Executive Management.
Governance
Board
Forward Looking Statements
This report contains forward looking statements relating to climate-related metrics, scenarios,
targets, projections and the anticipated impacts of climate-related risks, opportunities and
potential mitigations.
These statements are based on Management’s current understanding, estimates and
assumptions, informed by internal analysis combined with independent data considered
reasonable at the time of publication. The methodologies, assumptions and limitations used
are outlined in this report. However, significant uncertainty remains when making forward
projections, and outcomes may differ materially. Such differences may be the result of changes
in data, methodologies, scientific understanding, technology, regulation, market conditions
and other factors beyond Mainfreight’s control.
Accordingly, forward looking statements do not possess the same level of reliability as other
statements made in Mainfreight’s annual reporting or consolidated financial reporting.
Information relating to this report may change following its publication. Mainfreight does not
undertake any obligation to update or revise the information in this report, subject to applicable
disclosure requirements.
Nothing in this report constitutes guidance or advice with respect to the Group’s financial,
legal or strategic performance or growth. References to external materials or disclosures are
provided for context only, and do not form part of this report unless expressly stated otherwise.
Climate-related Disclosure Report
Introduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information
23

Figure 1. Climate Governance Structure & Engagement
Our Climate Governance Structure & Engagement
Executive Management (Management) is responsible for ensuring the business is identifying, managing
and controlling climate-related risks alongside other risks. Management’s oversight is supported by the
use of controls and procedures described in the Risk Management section below in addition to those for
the measurement and monitoring of GHG emissions and related metrics. These measures support but are
not directly integrated with other business functions.
Risk mitigation strategies directed by the Board are implemented and monitored by Management.
Performance towards these strategies, and new assessments of climate risks and hazards, are reported by
Management back to the Board and Audit Committee.
The Group Finance and Group Sustainability teams, reporting to the Chief Financial Officer, support the
practical implementation of climate-related risk mitigation strategies and transition planning. The Group
Sustainability Team is also responsible for preparing climate risk assessments and providing updated
information to Management and the Audit Committee.
Management
Board of
Directors
Roles and ResponsibilitiesEngagement
Audit
Committee
Executive
Management
All other
teams
Sustainability
and Finance
teams
The Board approves the Group Climate-related Risk Management Process. It receives and
reviews reports provided by the Audit Committee, and ensures the ongoing skills and
competencies of the governance function across the Board and relevant committees.
The Audit Committee oversees climate-related risks, and the setting and monitoring of
climate-related metrics and targets.
The Committee ensures risks are being managed in accordance with the Group’s
Climate-related Risk Management Process, and may make recommendations to the Board.
Executive Management is responsible for ensuring that the business is effectively following
and delivering on the Group Climate-related Risk Management Process.
All Mainfreight team members contribute to, and maintain, a workplace culture that
considers climate and sustainability risks and opportunities. This includes taking action
to reduce waste, use resources more efficiently, support our customers and incorporate
sustainable thinking into our everyday operations.
The Sustainability and Finance teams provide support with the consideration and
assessment of potential risks, as well as functional support in the implementation of the
Group Climate-related Risk Management Process.
Mainfreight’s Board meets six to eight times a year. Climate-
related matters are formally addressed at least once annually
and may also arise in the course of wider business discussions
throughout the year.
Mainfreight’s Audit Committee meets annually to review and
monitor climate-related risks and opportunities.
Mainfreight’s CFO, with support from the Sustainability Team
and Finance Team, reports annually into the Audit Committee.
Our wider Mainfreight team participate in monthly Positive
Action Team (PAT) meetings to discuss the state of our
operations and identify opportunities for improvement.
The Sustainability Team formally reviews climate-related risks
with the CFO annually, as well as on discovery of any new
material risk, or where an existing risk is evaluated to have
changed significantly.
Climate-related Disclosure Report
Introduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information
24

Climate-related
Risk Management
Process
1
5
2
4
3
I
d
e
n
t
i
f
y
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
M
e
a
s
u
r
e
M
a
n
a
g
e
M
o
n
i
t
o
r
Risk Management
Risk management is a fundamental component of effective governance, ensuring continued
progress against strategic objectives in the presence of emerging challenges and uncertainties.
Mainfreight’s Climate-related Risk Management Process, consistent with prior years, and shown in
Figure 2, outlines our steps to identify, measure, manage, monitor and control climate-related risks.
The risk models outlined in our strategy section and aligned with the measure and monitor
functions, provide an assessment based on impact and probability, consistent with a traditional risk
matrix. This allows us to assess and prioritise climate-related risks in the same manner we would any
other type of risk.
Figure 2.
Climate-related Risk
Management Process
Identify
1
We have used various sources to identify potentially relevant climate-related risks and
opportunities (CROs), including but not limited to:
·
Academic publications, scientific assessments and literature related to climate change
·
Policy guidance and public sector research
·
Industry and regional specific reports and developments
·
Regulation and formal standards
·
Independent natural and climate hazard risk assessments
·
Stakeholder engagement
·
Organisational experience with transition planning and implementation of new
technologies
·
Organisational experience with natural hazards, responses and resilience
·
Scenario Analysis
A CRO ‘long list’ is developed and shortlisted over three stages:
1. CROs are identified and categorised by type (Physical/Transition), sub type, and the nature
of the risk.
2. CROs are considered for potential impact, likelihood, proximity, relevance, data availability
and our ability to isolate and understand the risk independent of other factors.
3. Shortlisted risks evaluated as relevant and likely material are then explored in depth. New
information is sought from internal and external sources, and follow up workshops are
arranged with other segments of the business.
Assessments of materiality are made against possible impacts throughout both the business
and value chain to warrant their disclosure in this report. The absence of a specified risk here,
does not preclude that risk from assessment, and may well be addressed at local levels. Instead,
material risks are presented from a Group perspective.
25Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

2
Measure
Manage
After a climate-related risk is identified and assessed as material and its impact modelled, an appropriate management response is
developed and implemented. The responses generally fall within the following classifications:
Watch and wait
A material risk is acknowledged, but uncertainty around its
impact or the efficacy of more active responses requires further
information gathering. This differs from risk acceptance, here
a risk is being actively monitored until such a time as a more
informed response can be enacted, or until a risk is assessed
as immaterial.
Minimise or maximise
This response is associated with efforts to reduce or increase
the likelihood of a given risk or opportunity occurring.
These are more commonly applied to transition risks, where
there may be organisational influence to actively affect the
likelihood of given risks and opportunities. This is not often
the case for physical risks as a result of global climate change.
Mitigate or instigate
This response includes efforts taken to reduce the overall impact of a risk, were it to occur. These responses are more aligned to
physical risks and opportunities (although opportunities are largely constrained to competitive performance in preparedness for a
negative event). The most common form of mitigation is insurance. We hold building and contents policies for all our major facilities,
in addition to business disruption policies to safeguard our operations. However, there are also practical, proactive examples like
flood or fire prevention, and water and energy independence which can be effective strategies to instigate.
3
Once identified and assessed, financial impact models are
developed for each material risk using a combination of
internal and external data sources. These models are subject
to assumptions and uncertainty, which are disclosed in the
Models & Methodologies section of this report. Base models
are scaled over time and applied across scenarios using relevant
weightings, including carbon price and temperature change
assumptions. The resulting outputs are presented as anticipated
future impacts across defined time horizons. Scenario analysis
and risk modelling are undertaken annually.
Time Horizons
For each of the assessed risks and opportunities we have
compared their likely consequence across three time
horizons between present day and 2050.
Short Term: Present – 2030
Medium Term: 2031 – 2040
Long Term: 2041 – 2050
5
Control
The control element provides the resource and capability to deliver all other core functions of the
Climate-related Risk Management Process, along with determination of broader strategic responses.
Efforts to identify, standards to measure, projects to manage and conditions against which to
monitor risks are all formulated within risk management control. Our existing and well-practiced risk
management processes are critical to our resilience and adaptability to climate-related and other
business risks.
Monitor
4
Our risk monitoring process involves the regular evaluation and validation of the current state of
identified risks, as well as the level of collective risk. This is considered alongside the effectiveness of
management responses and interventions.
The outcome of risk monitoring is explored in more detail in the Strategy section, reflecting on the
changes in our modelled risks, and the efficacy of our transition planning since our last report.
26Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

Business Model, Value Chain and Strategy
Responsiveness
Through cultivating agility and decisiveness at all levels of the business, enabling swift responses to the diverse and evolving
implications of a global climate transition.
Embodied Resilience
Embedded within our infrastructure, systems, network design and people, to sustain the flow of goods during major
physical or transition related disruptions.
Innovation and Collaboration
Through developing new tools, services and partnerships that support both Mainfreight and our customers to succeed in
a lower carbon economy.
Mainfreight is an international provider of logistics and integrated supply chain solutions, spanning managed warehousing, domestic
and cross border transport, and international freight forwarding. Our network of 331 branches across 27 countries, supported by more
than 10,800 team members, connects businesses, markets and communities worldwide.
The Group operates as an internationally diversified logistics provider with a business model based on dynamic, substitutable network
links, rather than reliance on fixed or linear value chains. Logistics routes, freight modes, carriers, fuel sources, ports and other transport
nodes can be reconfigured as required, reflecting the long-standing reality of disruption within global trade and transportation. This
inherent flexibility is a defining characteristic of Mainfreight’s business model.
This distinction has two important implications for the identification and assessment of climate-related risks and opportunities. First,
value chain risks are proportionately less impactful as alternatives can often be quickly reconfigured. Second, climate-related risks
and opportunities that would be classified as value chain risks for many companies, are largely recognised as operational risks within
Mainfreight.
At Mainfreight, we are proudly long term thinkers. Our constantly stretching 100 year vision allows us to look beyond short term cycles
to the business we aim to be decades from now. In this context, our climate strategy and transition planning have been developed
specifically in response to our current understanding of climate-related risks and opportunities across our business model and value
chain.
Together, these pillars reflect a deliberate approach, prioritising actions that strengthen the resilience and adaptability of the business
across a wide range of future outcomes, rather than relying on a single predicted pathway.
Our approach is structured around three complementary strategic pillars:
Strategy
We identify and assess climate-related risks and
opportunities, and their potential implications for our
strategy and resilience over time. Through scenario
analysis and risk assessment, we consider how both
transition and physical factors may influence future
outcomes.
We disclose information to support an understanding
of the current and anticipated effects of climate-
related risks and opportunities on our business model
and value chain. This includes potential impacts on
operations, supply chains, costs and revenue, and how
these may evolve under different climate pathways.
There remains uncertainty in both the timing and
magnitude of these impacts. However, climate-
related factors are expected to become increasingly
relevant over time, requiring ongoing assessment and
refinement of our approach.
Our focus is on maintaining resilience across a range
of plausible futures, while taking a balanced approach
to managing risks and responding to emerging
opportunities.
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 27

Opportunities
Climate-related opportunities can arise from both transition and physical factors, though they are
more commonly associated with the transition to a low carbon economy.
This reflects the nature of physical risks, particularly acute events such as storms or wildfires,
which generally present limited upside. However, effective responses to such events may support
improved resilience or market positioning. In some cases, longer-term climate shifts may also create
opportunities for specific sectors or activities.
For this report we have identified only one transition opportunity and no physical opportunities:
·
Competitive Positioning: Opportunity for revenue and market share gain due to changing
customer preferences.
Transition Risks
Transition risks are those that emerge from efforts to shift global economies toward a low-carbon
future to mitigate the impacts of climate change. These risks can arise across a range of areas,
including policy, legal, technology, market, and reputation.
The pace of change, and the factors driving it, will influence how and where these risks materialise.
Many of these risks have a financial component, although this can be difficult to quantify with
precision.
For this report we have identified two material transition risks:
·
Technology Adoption: Risk of increased operating costs due to uptake of new technologies.
·
Competitive Positioning: Risk to revenue due to changing customer preferences.
·
Physical Risk to Assets – Acute: The risk of damage to assets, specifically facilities and
equipment from natural hazards including fluvial flood, wildfire, storm surge and windstorm.
·
Physical Risk to Operations – Acute: The risk of sustained impacts to our network and value
chain from natural hazards as measured by changes in revenue performance in affected areas.
·
Physical Risk to Operations – Chronic: The risk to revenue from customers in potentially
exposed industries as a result of chronic changes in climate including drought, increased
precipitation and sea level rise.
Physical Risks
Physical risks are those that arise from both extreme weather events (acute risks) and gradual
changes in climate patterns (chronic risks).
They present operational, financial, and supply chain risks to organisations, as well as broader risks
to people and communities. These include impacts on the safety, wellbeing, and livelihoods of our
team members and customers.
For this report we have identified the following physical risks:
Understanding Climate-related Risks and Opportunities
Overview of Impacts and Financial Position
In the current financial year, no climate-related risk or opportunity has resulted in a material
impact on Mainfreight’s financial position, financial performance or cash flows.
Climate-related physical risks to assets, even in aggregate, remain well below 0.1% of total
asset value. The anticipated impact of all climate-related transition risks and opportunities
are also below 1% of Group revenue. Accordingly, there is no identified risk of a material
adjustment to the carrying values of assets or liabilities in the financial statements arising
from climate-related factors.
Looking ahead, our assessment of anticipated impacts indicates that climate-related risks
and opportunities are not expected to have a material effect on Mainfreight’s financial
prospects across the short, medium and long term under the scenarios assessed. Modelled
impacts remain below 1% of revenue or assets in all cases, with most materially lower.
While transition risks, technology adoption and competitive positioning, have the potential
to become more impactful over time, they are highly uncertain and difficult to reliably
attribute or validate. As a result, financial planning takes a cautious approach aligned with
our three strategic pillars, prioritising responsiveness and flexibility over predetermined
specific pathways.
Hazard and climate considerations are already incorporated into land and facility acquisition
decisions, and emerging risk insights may inform future ownership structures in areas of
higher risk. Mainfreight continues to maintain a strong financial position, with no anticipated
changes to funding sources or structure arising from climate-related risks or opportunities.
From a business model and value chain perspective, our overall assessment provides
confidence in the strength and flexibility of the Group’s operating model. Further detail on
the underlying assumptions, scenarios, time horizons, and quantified outputs supporting
this assessment are provided in the section that follows.
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 28

Our Approach to Scenario Analysis and Selection
To assess our resilience to plausible climate futures, three scenarios have been chosen and modelled here,
as seen below in Table 1. These allow us to explore the range of impacts different emission pathways could
have on our material risks and opportunities.
All three scenarios are based on the “Middle of the Road” Shared Socioeconomic Pathway (SSP2). This
pathway does not markedly shift from historical patterns, where both global and local institutions make
slow progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Each scenario has been built from this same
starting point and explores how varying levels of physical and transition risks could lead to different
climate futures. The SSP framework is widely used in the climate change research community to facilitate
the integrated analysis of future climate impacts, vulnerabilities, adaptation and mitigation.
External data was sourced from the Network for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) Phase V Scenario
Explorer, using the REMIND-MAgPIE 3.3-4.8 model which uses data inputs released up to March 2024.
Unlike many of the scenario explorer databases available, the NGFS scenarios use the most up to date
climate models, with Phase VI expected to be released later this year. They produce internally consistent
pathways which link macroeconomic development, energy systems, land use and climate outcomes. These
outputs are applicable at the global level, which allows us to analyse the effects of different scenarios
in all regions Mainfreight operates in. The REMIND-MAgPIE model has a broad range of temperature
outcomes, and is the only NGFS model which integrates potential future damages from physical risks.
These scenarios were selected in order to capture a range of assumptions about uncertain futures. Two of
our scenarios meet the Paris Agreement goal of <2°C by 2100, but compare the effects of a smooth and
delayed transition. Our third scenario leads to a hot house world, where emissions continue to rise into the
long term above 3°C by 2100.
Climate Scenarios
ScenarioOrderly TransitionDisorderly TransitionBusiness As Usual
Action to reduce emissionsImmediateDelayedNone
Policies to achieve low-carbon economyHigh coordinationRegional variationNo new policies enacted
Global Mean Temperature increase by 2100
(67th Percentile)
1.5°C1.9 °C3.3°C
Net EmissionsSmooth transition to net zero by 2055
Delayed and more severe transition to a low
emissions economy
Fluctuate before steadily reducing from 2060
Transition ImpactsModerateModerateLow
Physical ImpactsLowModerateHigh
Short Term Temperature Increase (2030)1.64°C1.65°C1.65°C
Medium Term Temperature Increase (2040)1.77°C1.91°C1.95°C
Long Term Temperature Increase (2050)1.74° C1.98°C2.21°C
Transportation EnergyStarts to decline from 2025Declines from 2035Continually increases
Transportation Energy Mix
Transitions towards electric and lower carbon
fuels
Less rapid transition to electric and low carbon
fuels, remains reliant on oil
Remains reliant on oil with a small introduction of
lower carbon fuels and electricity
Investment in Energy Supply
Investment in low carbon sources and energy
efficiency, with significantly reduced reliance on
fossil fuels by 2040
Investment in low carbon sources and energy
efficiency, with significantly reduced reliance on
fossil fuels by 2050
Low investment in low carbon sources and
energy efficiency, remains reliant on fossil fuels
Carbon PriceSteady increase from 2020Steep increase from 2030Consistently very low
Carbon Sequestration
Most emissions are captured as well as using
land-based sinks
Most emissions are captured as well as using
land-based sinks
Relies on land-based sinks (e.g. afforestation, soil
carbon enhancement, biochar)
Scenario Explorer DataNet Zero 2050Delayed TransitionCurrent Policies
All scenario data was accessed through: NGFS Phase V Scenario Explorer hosted by IIASA and uses REMIND-MAgPIE 3.3-4.8 inputs
General Details
Trends to 2050
Table 1. Mainfreight Climate Scenarios
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 29

The relationship between scenarios, risk type and time horizon, loosely follows the dynamic outlined
in Figure 3.
In simplistic terms, transition and physical risks have an inverse relationship. A Business as Usual
(BAU) scenario imposes little to no transition risk, but extreme physical risk. Alternatively, in our
Orderly Transition scenario, the worst of the physical risks are largely avoided through the immediate
and sustained efforts towards decarbonisation (transition impacts).
Interpretation and Link to Time Horizons
Our Climate Scenarios
Orderly Transition
1.5°C
The defining characteristic of the Orderly Transition scenario, the most optimistic of the three,
is an immediate, and largely coordinated, global response towards climate action, resulting
in a 1.5°C temperature increase by 2100. Driven by nonpartisan cooperation and resounding
public consensus, ambitious policy and fiscal intervention is made towards decarbonisation.
A clear pathway is defined for the phase-out of fossil fuels, creating certainty and spurring
investment in climate friendly technologies. Industry, investor and community groups fill
the remaining voids, driving decarbonisation in international shipping, aviation and wider
transport, allocating capital to fast transitioning businesses, and divesting and litigating
against laggards.
Coordinated national and international transport planning facilitates intermodal connectivity,
permitting short term mitigation, as harder to abate sectors continue to evolve. Low carbon
technologies perform better than expected, rapidly improving their operational efficiency,
and accelerating the displacement of legacy technologies.
A systems approach is taken to the development of supporting infrastructure, particularly
towards electrification. Renewable generation grows exponentially, and is supplemented
by large grid-scale batteries. Investment in transmission and distribution is made early, in
preparation for growing demands, and commercial operators are incentivised toward self-
generation and building grid resilience.
Increasing transparency and growing concern quickly shifts consumer preferences and
behaviour toward more sustainable alternatives, and the associated premium allows for further
reinvestment.
Climate-related events, spurred by already increasing temperatures, incite greater interest and
investment in the transition, rather than distract from it.
Under this scenario, the most severe climate impacts and catastrophic events are largely
avoided. However, even with substantial policy and market support, organisations face
significant near term transition risks, with those that are poorly prepared or heavily entrenched
in emissions intensive activities most exposed.
Orderly Transition
Disorderly Transition
Business As Usual
High
High
High
Low
Low
Low
2020
2020
2020
2050
2050
2050
2030
2030
2030
2060
2060
2060
2040
2040
2040
Figure 3. Interpretation and Link to Time HorizonsPhysical RisksTransition Risks
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 30

Disorderly Transition
1.9 °C
In the Disorderly Transition scenario, competing social and geopolitical interests persist, resulting
in little short term international coordination towards decarbonisation. The result is a 1.9°C hotter
world by 2100, missing the lower 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement.
Fossil fuel use peaks by 2030, but demand remains sticky. Lower emission fossil fuels, like natural
gas, divert attention from greater renewable and energy system investment.
Globally, organisations struggle to stay abreast of disparate regional regulations and policy
frameworks, adding to confusion and delaying critical investments. A lack of transparency makes
organisation and industry performance toward climate aims difficult to assess. Consumer and
market responses, as a result, are relatively muted.
In the early 2030s, the world reaches an abrupt tipping point. Social and consumer frustrations
confront a slow moving political and industrial response, and lead to a dramatic shift in policy, and
accelerated international collaboration.
With a delayed starting point, the response required is now steeper. Significant and highly
disruptive policy interventions are implemented, imposing a massive strain on economic and
social systems.
Competition for low emission technologies is intense, further pushing up prices and leaving out
many smaller players and markets.
Policy action, combined with a rapid escalation in emissions pricing, significantly devalues emissions
intensive assets. Industries with difficult abatement pathways face substantial cost increases, which
are largely passed through to customers. As a result, aviation becomes prohibitively expensive for
many consumers and cargo interests over the medium term.
The growing incidence of major climate events due to warming temperatures further complicates
global investment priorities between mitigation, remediation and adaptation.
Business as Usual (BAU)
3.3°C
Our final scenario, Business as Usual (BAU), is the most broadly impactful. Here, there is little to no
effective coordination over the short, medium and longer terms.
Competitive global politics detract from national efforts towards the transition. Without any clear
global leadership, there are few incentives for nations to decarbonise, while others continue to
proliferate fossil fuels.
Economies and industry stay the current course, largely unencumbered by regulation or forces for
change. Low emission technologies remain niche in most markets, and their inability to reach scale
prevents them from being cost competitive with legacy technology until nearer mid-century.
The gains that are made toward decarbonisation and renewable energy are largely offset by growth
in population and consumption over the medium term.
Widespread climate-related catastrophes become increasingly common, and government
expenditure is heavily directed towards recurring recoveries and rebuilding national infrastructure.
Industry responds to growing uncertainty by becoming increasingly cost sensitive and, coupled with
pervasive insurance unaffordability, there are major headwinds towards productive investments.
Extreme climate-related events constantly disrupt industry, supply chains and the markets they seek
to serve. The rolling crises increase the costs of production and shipping. Communities, struggling
to adjust, see their disposable incomes shrink. The outcome is deep economic retrenchment.
Despite the lack of investment and coordination, renewables and low emission technologies slowly
supplant existing energy systems and technologies on a cost basis.
Climate, economic and social systems are permanently changed.
Events & Claims
Mainfreight is a large international company with a diverse and dispersed network of facilities around
the world. As such, minor disruptions due to natural hazards are common, which our network is adept
at quickly responding to.
Over the past five years we have experienced three significant climate-related events (each with total
pre-insurance impacts in excess of NZ$100,000):
·
October Storms – South Island, New Zealand, October 2025
·
Cyclone Gabrielle – Hawke’s Bay, New Zealand, February 2023
·
New South Wales (NSW) Floods – New South Wales, Australia, November 2023
In the past year, we have recorded two minor climate and natural hazard related claims, these are:
·
Storm damage in New Plymouth, New Zealand
·
Storm damage in Wellington, New Zealand
Mainfreight maintains comprehensive insurance coverage that includes both direct physical impacts
and impacts to operations, with all events covered under existing policies. Gross impacts recognised in
the 2026 financial year totalled approximately NZ$300,000.
Current Physical Impacts
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 31

Physical Impacts to Assets - Acute
This risk considers the impact to our assets including
our facilities and equipment arising from significant
natural hazard events. Hazards that have been
identified and assessed include; Fluvial Flood, Storm
Surge, Wildfire and Windstorm. Other potential natural
hazards including Pluvial Flood and Hailstorm have not
been included due to lower assessed exposure.
Estimated Annual Loss
The foundation for our modelling of future anticipated impacts,
is our Estimated Annual Loss (EAL). In prior reports this metric
was referred to as our Climate Impact Accrual; however, to avoid
confusion with financial accrual accounting, the terminology
has been updated.
This model is designed to assess the probability and potential
impact of different classes of identified acute physical risks
(Fluvial Flood, Wildfire, Storm Surge, Windstorm) at each of our
sites around the world. For each branch and class of risk, an
annualised loss against asset and equipment value is calculated
for both pre and post insurance (gross and net respectively).
The primary input to our modelling was a natural and climate
hazard assessment provided by Gallagher, with licensed use
of the Swiss Re CatNet software, updated for 2026. Hazard
data was assessed in conjunction with asset type, asset value,
ownership model and insurance coverage, to determine
relative exposure in a given year.
The commentary and underlying analysis are subject to the
assumptions and limitations of the model, which will continue
to be updated and improved as new data and information
becomes available.
Actual experience over the past four years has met the
modelled Estimated Annual Loss in only one year, and has been
materially lower in the most recent two years. This provides
confidence that the current modelling approach remains
conservative overall.
20,000,000
202520302035204020452050
180,000,000
140,000,000
100,000,000
60,000,000
Business as Usual
Disorderly Transition
Orderly Transition
Figure 4. Gross Exposure Over Time in NZ$
Future Physical Impacts to Assets
Our assessment of physical risks to assets has identified several key insights to support business decision-making. These insights inform
where and what mitigation measures may be most effective, how the business can best prepare for and respond to potential events, and
where capital investment can best support climate resilient growth.
Key observations include:
Flooding remains the Group’s highest international physical
risk, accounting for 51% of total hazard risk on a gross basis
and 34% net of insurance. Exposure is highest in Europe
and Australia, with lower, but still significant exposure in
New Zealand.
Wildfire risk is highly concentrated in Queensland, Australia,
with Australia accounting for more than 90% of the Group’s total
wildfire exposure.
Storm surge and windstorm present similar levels of exposure
on a net basis, accounting for 26% and 25% respectively. However,
on a gross basis the risk profile differs substantially, with storm
surge representing 37% of total hazard risk compared to just 3%
for windstorm. This reflects the differing nature of these risks:
storm surge events are infrequent but severe, while windstorms
occur regularly but are generally minor. Insurance excess
structures further amplify this effect, with windstorm losses
disproportionately represented in net outcomes due to a higher
frequency of smaller claims.
New Zealand, which has high relative exposure to windstorm risk,
shows broadly comparable net exposure to Australia and Europe,
despite being considerably lower in gross terms.
Europe continues to represent the Group’s highest overall physical
risk exposure. This is influenced, and to some extent mitigated, by
comparatively lower asset ownership relative to New Zealand and
Australia.
The Americas, characterised by lower asset ownership, a higher
proportion of Air & Ocean operations, and a generally lower
hazard profile, carries significantly less overall physical risk than
our other major trading regions.
Our Air & Ocean business unit, while having a smaller physical
footprint and lower direct exposure to acute physical risks,
remains highly reliant on critical infrastructure such as ports and
airports. Disruption to this infrastructure could result in material
operational impacts.
Tables 2 through 5 present the aggregation of Estimated Annual Losses across time horizons, weighted under each of our three climate
scenarios.
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 32

Scenario 1. OrderlyScenario 2. DisorderlyScenario 3. BAU
Operating RegionShortMediumLongShortMediumLongShortMediumLong
Americas4 5 8 ,1611,965,8584,773,4224 5 8 ,1612,121,9515 , 417, 0154 5 8 ,1612 ,167, 3 6 46,070,172
Asia7 7, 4 4 0332,277806,8247 7, 4 4 03 5 8 , 6 61915,6067 7, 4 4 0366,3371,026,006
Australia3 , 6 5 7, 5 2 015,693,52838,106,4433 , 6 5 7, 5 2 016,939, 62843,244,2693 , 6 5 7, 5 2 017, 3 0 2 ,16 048,458,450
Europe5,824,07824,989,70660, 679,0765,824,07826,973,94368,860,3335,824,0782 7, 5 51, 2 2477,16 3,172
New Zealand3,0 41, 51213,050,38831,688,4663,0 41, 51214,086,61735,960,9683,0 41, 51214,388,09040,296,963
Grand Total
13,058,711 56,031,757 136,054,231 13,058,711 60,480,800 154,398,191 13,058,711 61,775,175 173,014 ,76 3
Scenario 1. OrderlyScenario 2. DisorderlyScenario 3. BAU
EventShortMediumLongShortMediumLongShortMediumLong
Fluvial Flood
6,680,100 28,662,686 69, 59 7, 670 6,680,100 30,938,566 78,981,405 6,680,100 31,600,695 88,504,594
Storm Surge
4,772,397 2 0 , 47 7,19 5 49,721,96 4 4,772,397 2 2,103,128 56,425,891 4,772,397 2 2, 576 ,167 63,229,447
Wildfire
1,176,409 5,047,686 12, 256,605 1,176,409 5,448,484 13,909,142 1,176,409 5,565,089 15,586,237
Windstorm
429,805 1, 8 4 4 ,19 0 4 , 47 7,9 9 2 429,805 1,990,622 5,081,753 429,805 2,033,224 5,694,485
Grand Total
13,058,711 56,031,757 136,054,231 13,058,711 60,480,800 154,398,191 13,058,711 61,775,175 173,014,763
Scenario 1. OrderlyScenario 2. DisorderlyScenario 3. BAU
EventShortMediumLongShortMediumLongShortMediumLong
Fluvial Flood
585,844 2, 519, 221 6 ,119,76 3 585,844 2,719, 252 6,944,881 585,844 2,777,449 7, 78 2 , 2 6 0
Storm Surge
436,911 1,878,787 4,564,005 436,911 2 , 0 2 7,9 67 5,179, 3 6 0 436,911 2,071,368 5,803,862
Wildfire
258,794 1,112 , 8 5 3 2,703, 374 258,794 1, 201, 216 3 , 0 67, 8 6 5 258,794 1, 226,924 3,437,773
Windstorm
428,550 1,842,831 4,476,657 428,550 1,989,15 6 5,080,238 428,550 2,031,726 5,692,788
Grand Total
1,710,099 7,353,692 17,863,799 1,710,099 7,9 37, 59 1 20,272,344 1,710,099 8 ,107, 4 67 22,716,683
Scenario 1. OrderlyScenario 2. DisorderlyScenario 3. BAU
Operating RegionShortMediumLongShortMediumLongShortMediumLong
Americas37,18 2159, 8 89388,40737,18 2172, 58 5440,77537,18 2176 , 278493,922
Asia5,17622,25654,0675,17624,02461, 3 5 65,17624,53868,754
Australia5 37, 6 872,312,1395, 616 ,7145 37, 6 872,495,7286 , 374,0 065 37, 6 872, 5 49,14 07,14 2 , 5 5 2
Europe611, 0 672,627,6836,383,242611, 0 672,836,3267, 24 3 , 8 8 4611, 0 672,897,0288 ,117, 315
New Zealand518,9872, 231,7255,421,369518,9872,408,9286 ,152, 323518,9872,460,4836 , 894 ,14 0
Grand Total
1,710,099 7,353,692 17,863,799 1,710,099 7,9 37, 59 1 20,272,344 1,710,099 8 ,107, 4 67 22,716,683
Table 2. Future Physical Impacts by Region, Scenario and Time Horizon (Gross) in NZ$
Table 3. Future Physical Impacts by Region, Scenario and Time Horizon (Net) in NZ$
Table 4. Future Physical Impacts by Event, Scenario and Time Horizon (Gross) in NZ$
Table 5. Future Physical Impacts by Event, Scenario and Time Horizon (Net) in NZ$
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 33

EventRange Reported
Region
Impacted
Event Area
Performance
Regional
Performance
Operating
Difference
New and updated events
2025 NSW Floods
May 2025
Nov 24 – Oct 25Australia30.5%32.9%-2.4%
LA Wildfires
Jan 2025
Jul 24 - Jun 25Americas12 7. 2 %141.4%-14. 2%
Previously reported on events
Hurricane Milton
Oc t 2024
Apr 24 – Mar 25Americas0.5%16 .1%-15.6%
China Floods
Jun 2024
Dec 23 – Nov 24Asia29.0 %18.5%10.5%
NSW Floods
Dec 2023
Jun 23 – May 24Australia-2.2%-3.9%1.7%
Cyclone Jasper
Dec 2023
Jun 23 – May 24Australia-6.2%-3.9%-2.3%
Cyclone Gabrielle
Feb 2023
Aug 22 – Jul 23New Zealand10.2%1.5%8.7%
Auckland Floods
Jan 2023
Jul 22 – Jun 23New Zealand4.3%5.4%-1.1%
Hurricane Ian
Sep 2022
Mar 22 – Feb 23Americas28.2%20.6%7. 6%
Table 6. Case Study Assessment
Regional Examples
This year, we have added an expanded look at one significant event, the NSW Floods that took place
in 2025.
In our examples on page 35, revenue has been mapped for the impacted area against the regional
performance (plotted with a secondary axis to provide a better comparison), with the event date
depicted by a grey vertical line. Consistent with the findings above, and from previously examined
events, there is no sustained detrimental impact to operational performance from these major
events.
Future Physical Impacts to Operations - Acute
Case Study Assessment
In our 2025 report, we introduced a case study approach to assess how climate-related events
influence the long term growth prospects of affected regions. For 2026 FY, this methodology was
refined through the introduction of a materiality threshold of NZ$1 billion to the wider national
economy, ensuring the analysis focuses on the most consequential events.
As a result of this refinement, the following updates were made to the case study set:
·
Added: NSW Floods – Sydney, AU (May 2025)
·
Expanded timeframe: LA Wildfires (Palisades and Eaton) – California, USA (January 2025), with
comparison periods extended to 12 months
·
Removed (below threshold): Dunedin Floods – Otago, NZ (October 2024)
·
Removed (below threshold): East Coast Floods – Hawke’s Bay, NZ (June 2024)
Consistent with prior years, the analysis maps a 12-month period centred around each event,
comparing revenue performance in the impacted area against broader regional performance
across both inbound and outbound freight flows.
Overall, results show a mixed but broadly consistent pattern (see Table 6). Of the areas analysed,
three outperformed their regions, two performed in line (within 2%), and four underperformed.
While this distribution largely mirrors previous findings, some differences have emerged.
Historically, climate events have resulted in a short term reduction in freight volumes (typically one
to two weeks), followed by recovery to at or above regional averages. However, in the case of the
2025 NSW Floods, despite the larger economic impact relative to earlier events, no corresponding
short term reduction in Mainfreight’s regional revenue was observed.
To explain these outcomes, we consider several potential mechanisms that may mitigate the
negative effects of natural disasters on freight demand:
·
Urgent essentials: In early disaster response, a significant supply of essential goods are
required to get communities back on their feet, with food, beverages and pharmaceuticals in
high demand. These are all profiles of freight where Mainfreight is well represented.
·
Stretching supply chains: Over the short to medium term, disruption to traditional supply
chains and sources of supply will prompt businesses to look further afield, increasing the
broader freight task.
·
Build back: Looking ahead, communities will need to rebuild, resulting in a likely increase
in new building and construction, and with it, the direct and indirect freight flows needed to
facilitate this activity. We expect this will be difficult to observe from the relatively short periods
considered here, and are likely to be more applicable to especially destructive events.
While the consistency of results across multiple years lends some confidence to these interpretations,
there remains a high degree of uncertainty, reflecting the limited sample size and the influence of
external variables.
This risk examines how natural hazards affect our network and value chain, measured through
changes in relative revenue performance across impacted areas. Potential impacts relate to shifts in
freight flows as local industries and communities are disrupted, and the resulting changes in freight
task as we adapt to serve different needs and support affected customers.
While the assessment is backward-looking, the findings offer future insight into market resilience
and the pace of normalisation following major events.
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 34

In May 2025, New South Wales experienced another major flooding event following prolonged heavy
rainfall and successive storm systems, impacting Sydney, the Hunter Valley, and coastal regions. Rivers
exceeded capacity, causing widespread inundation, evacuations, and emergency rescues, with some
areas surpassing historical flood levels.
The floods caused significant disruption to communities and infrastructure, including transport closures,
supply chain interruptions, and property damage. Mainfreight operations were affected by restricted
access, network delays, and freight rerouting challenges.
Figure 5 indicates that, unlike previous events, there was no significant disruption observed across
either NSW or the wider Australian network. Performance remained stable throughout the period,
suggesting improved resilience in operations. This outcome likely reflects lessons learned from earlier
flooding events in 2023, with enhanced preparedness, contingency planning, and network adaptability
helping to mitigate potential impacts.
Physical Impacts to Operations - Chronic
This risk considers the impact to revenue from customers downtrading in industries potentially exposed
to chronic physical risks including Droughts, Increases in Precipitation and Sea level Rise.
Chronic changes in climate, and the associated physical risks, have been viewed here as less impactful
to Mainfreight relative to acute physical events and transition impacts.
However, there are anticipated chronic risks in the regions that we operate in, which could be material
to the local customers and industries we serve (see Table 7). The most notable of these is drought, rated
Very High in all regions except New Zealand (Medium). Conversely New Zealand sees Sea Level Rise
rated as High compared to Medium or Significant in other regions. Increase Precipitation is assessed as
presenting Low to Negligible risk across all regions.
In Table 8 we have grouped our customer verticals (industry segments), relative to the perceived
exposure of their operations and value chains to chronic risks. As an example, agriculture would be
considered directly impacted, whereas industries that rely on agricultural raw materials would be
indirectly impacted.
Approximately 5.6% of Mainfreight’s revenue is derived from industries assessed as directly exposed to
chronic physical risks, with less than 20% of revenue attributable to industries that are either directly or
indirectly exposed. These proportions are consistent with prior reporting periods. Revenue, including
that associated with chronic risk-exposed industries, is also well distributed across operating regions,
reducing sensitivity to localised climate impacts.
Overall, Mainfreight maintains a diverse industry revenue base. This reflects the Group’s resilience, not
just to chronic climate-related risks, but to any number of business risks and potential disruptions.
In February 2023, Cyclone Gabrielle caused widespread devastation across the Hawke’s Bay and
Gisborne on New Zealand’s East Coast, bringing torrential rain, strong winds, and severe flooding.
The event triggered landslips, infrastructure damage, and widespread power outages, with some
communities completely isolated.
Freight networks were heavily disrupted, with key routes closed and limited access to affected areas.
Mainfreight operations were impacted by road and rail disruptions, along with reduced operating
capacity at some sites. Teams focused on rerouting freight, maintaining essential deliveries, and
supporting recovery efforts.
Figure 6 shows that the region experienced a sharper initial decline in revenue compared to the
broader New Zealand network, reflecting disrupted demand and emergency freight activities. This was
followed by a period of recovery, with performance rebounding above national trends before gradually
normalising.
Revenue Exposure to
Chronic Risks AmericasAsiaAustraliaEurope
New
Zealand
Grand
Tot al
Directly Exposed0.50%0.06%1.55%1.07%2.41%5.59%
Indirectly Exposed2.71%0 .18 %5.28%1.57%4.44%14 .18 %
Not Exposed15.90%5.44%24. 21%20 .15%14.53%80.23%
Grand Total19.11%5.68%31.04%22.79%21.38%100.00%
Chronic RiskAmericasAsiaAustraliaEuropeNew Zealand
DroughtVery HighVery HighVery HighVery HighMedium
PrecipitationNegligibleNegligibleVery LowNegligibleNegligible
Sea Level RiseSignificantMediumSignificantSignificantHigh
Table 7. Regional Chronic Risk RatingsTable 8. Group Revenue Split by Chronic Risk Exposure & Region
Figure 6. Cyclone Gabrielle Impact on Revenue
Feb 22
Hawke’s Bay Area Revenue
New Zealand Revenue
Feb 24Feb 23
Cyclone Gabrielle, New Zealand
Figure 5. 2025 NSW Floods Impact on Revenue
May 24
NSW Area Revenue
Australian Revenue
Mar 26
May 25
2025 New South Wales Floods,
Australia
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 35

Transition Risk
Technology Adoption
Summary
Our interpretation of the risk associated with technology adoption relates to the additional costs of
pursuing emerging low-emission technologies, covering Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF), Sustainable
Maritime Fuels (SMF), and Heavy Electric Vehicles (HEV). These costs may stem from increased capital
investment, operational changes and supporting infrastructure, with uncertainty as to whether such
costs can be passed on and recovered from customers.
Transition Impacts
Transport and logistics are a significant source of greenhouse gas emissions contributing to climate
change, and one that continues to grow. It is then unsurprising that our industry features prominently in
both organisational and national transition strategies.
The impacts of the global transition to date have varied widely, reflecting differences in the pace, scope
and prioritisation of national and industrial responses. These are complicated further by other recent, but
unrelated, disruptions in the global supply chain, ranging from a pandemic to regional conflicts and trade
wars. In this context, climate-related transition impacts can be difficult to clearly distinguish from other
supply chain interdependencies.
In 2026 for the first time we have sought to quantify transition impacts as they relate to our business and
value chain. In doing so, we have consolidated and simplified our list of disclosed transition risks and
opportunities to two, and excluded others on the basis of materiality. These are presented in detail below,
covering both current and anticipated impacts across multiple time horizons.
Current Impact
The calculated current impact in year one across each technology
at their respective uptake, premiums and recovery rates is:
NZ$2,000,000
Anticipated Impact
The anticipated impact over the short to medium term is:
NZ$6,000,000 to NZ$46,000,000
Uncertainty
Current impact uncertainty is low to moderate.
SAF and SMF pilots are in early stages with no recorded impact
to date. Heavy electric vehicles carry known cost trade-offs, with
higher upfront costs, financing and infrastructure investments
offset by lower operating costs and increased customer value.
However, the exact net position remains difficult to quantify.
Anticipated impact uncertainty is high to very high.
The availability, cost, and uptake of low-emission technologies
depend on a wide range of factors; from government policy and
industry collaboration to technological breakthroughs that could
reshape current assumptions.
annualised
MethodologyMateriality
Management Response
Related Metrics
The model applies expected uptake rates for each low-emission
technology to existing spend by freight mode. Then, it calculates
the associated cost premium and customer recovery to determine
the net unrecovered cost in a given year. These are summed across
technologies to give our implied risk. Spend growth is projected
at 7%, annually compounding, with uptake, premium, and recovery
rates varying by technology, time horizon, and climate scenario.
On pure measures of financial materiality, this risk would be
unlikely to qualify, peaking in the medium term at 0.63% of
revenue (in our Orderly scenario). However, the adoption of
these technologies is considered critical to Mainfreight’s broader
efforts to decarbonise.
We see this risk as relating to, and in part resulting from, the
Innovation and Collaboration pillar of our transition planning.
Without adoption of these technologies there will be almost
no practical pathway towards decarbonisation. However,
miscalculating the pace of uptake has significant implications for
the operating costs of the business.
Heavy fleet electrification – currently at 1.5%
Uptake of SAF and SMFs – in early-stage pilots
This risk is likely to be most significant in the
Orderly and Disorderly scenarios, and over
the short and medium timeframes, but more
intensely felt in the latter.
Inclusions
The model covers low emission technologies across air, sea, and
road freight, representing approximately 95% of Mainfreight’s total
GHG emissions.
Exclusions
Rail and inland waterway have been excluded given their relatively
small contribution to total emissions. Less feasible technologies
such as hydrogen fuel cells and further electrification of sea and
air freight have not been assessed. Infrastructure and operational
technologies are also excluded, as these costs are not directly
recoverable from customers.
BAU
LONG
Scenario
Time Horizon
DISORDERLY
MEDIUM
ORDERLY
SHORT
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 36

Transition Risk and OpportunityCompetitive Positioning
Current Impact
The calculated current financial impact associated with our
balanced pathway (interpreted as the most realistic) is between:
-NZ$12,000,000 to NZ$50,000,000
This reflects the range between risk and opportunity.
Anticipated Impact
The anticipated risk impact over the medium to long term is:
NZ$16,000,000 to NZ$19,000,000
The anticipated opportunity impact over the
medium to long term is:
NZ$63,000,000 to NZ$75,000,000
Uncertainty
Current impact uncertainty is high.
It is difficult to isolate revenue or market share gains directly
attributable to sustainability performance, and well-documented
‘say-do’ gaps between public commitments and actual
procurement decisions add further complexity. While the
estimated impact is a matter of a few percentage points,
applied to revenue in the billions, small differences produce
significant swings.
Anticipated impact uncertainty is very high.
These dynamics compound at scale over time. For this reason,
we have intentionally presented the impacts of Competitive
Positioning as a range between potential risk and opportunity,
acknowledging that the path forward is not yet clear-cut.
annualised
annualised
MethodologyMateriality
Management Response
Related Metrics
The model applies different annual sustainability investment
(capital expenditure) assumptions to Group revenue based on
three strategic pathways: Ambitious (2%), Balanced (0.5%), and
Conservative (0.1%).
Revenue is segmented into three customer groups based on how
they weight climate performance in procurement decisions:
Leaders: Weight climate efforts highly
Leaners: Weight climate efforts to some degree
Learners: Do not materially weight climate efforts
Each pathway and segment combination infers a retention/
conversion rate, reflecting lost or gained revenue accordingly.
One key variable distinguishes risk from opportunity: the assumed
‘new sustainability opportunity as % of revenue.’
At 5%, all pathways produce net losses (risk). At 10%, two of three
pathways produce net gains (opportunity).
Inclusions
The model is driven by revenue and assumptions around customer
segmentation and responsiveness to climate positioning. Capital
expenditure is presented as a proportion of revenue and is
intended to represent a broad range of mitigation and adaptation
investments including solar, battery storage, chargers, energy-
efficient equipment, digital platforms, water capture, and electric
vehicles.
Exclusions
Technology adoption costs for SAF, SMFs, and Owner Drivers’
HEVs are excluded and addressed separately under the
Technology Adoption risk. Other operating expenditure items such
as leased equipment and renewable energy certificates are also
excluded.
By the numbers, this risk/opportunity is our most significant
and is potentially financially material. However, it is also highly
uncertain and sensitive to even minor changes in assumptions.
The calculated impact, presented as a range, does not point to a
single course of action, it may represent a cost to manage or an
opportunity to pursue.
Fundamentally, this risk/opportunity reflects how responding to
customers’ needs and expectations in respect to sustainability
and climate will drive changes in market share. Getting this right
(or especially wrong) will undoubtedly be material.
All three of our transition planning pillars are expected to engage
with this risk/opportunity in some manner. Responsiveness
ensures we are constantly abreast of customer expectations and
perceptions of value. Innovation and Collaboration enable us
to effectively respond to those changing needs and deliver the
services and solutions that support our customers’ own transition
efforts.
Embodied Resilience, and climate adaptation more broadly,
tends to attract less attention than mitigation. However, we
expect this to shift as the physical impacts of climate change
become more widely felt. Providing confidence that inventory
in our care is protected from hazards, and maintaining the
integrity of customer value chains through periods of disruption,
will become increasingly important factors in supply chain
relationships.
Rooftop solar arrays – currently 12.0MW
Battery energy storage systems – currently 11.8MWh
Summary
Our assessment explores the capital outlay required to support possible climate focused
strategic pathways, and the responsiveness of different customer segments to our perceived
adherence with them.
The most significant impacts are expected
to emerge over the medium term under our
Orderly scenario, and over the medium to
longer term under our Disorderly scenario.
Scenario
Time Horizon
BAU
LONG
DISORDERLY
MEDIUM
ORDERLY
SHORT
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 37

Acute Physical Impacts to Assets
The key input to our modelling was a natural and climate hazard
assessment provided by Gallagher with licensed use of the Swiss
Re CatNet software, and updated for 2026. This provided an
evaluation of all major hazard classes for over 240 sites around the
world.
These ratings informed our assessment of probability.
For example, if a branch is deemed to be at risk of a
1-in-100-year flood, the applied single year probability for a flood
at that branch is 1%. Other risks were translated from different
qualitative terms to similar percentage scales as outlined in
Additional Information on page 47, Table 13.
For consideration of the impact of an event if it were to occur,
we have used a simplified classification of branch values based
on size, type and ownership model (see page 47, Table 14). Each
event was then individually assessed as having a detrimental
impact as a proportion of the total asset value (see page 48,
Tab l e 15). For example, a storm surge event at an owned,
extra-large transport facility would have a pre-insurance and pre-
mitigation calculation of NZ$100m x 20%, totalling NZ$20m.
The calculated impact is then multiplied by the event probability
to generate both a pre-insurance (gross) and a post-insurance/
mitigation (net) loss.
Impact over Time Horizons
To calculate the risk over our three specified time horizons, we
accumulate the Estimated Annual Loss by years, alongside an
expected average annual compounding growth rate of 7%.
Applying Scenarios
The final step is to apply separate weightings relative to our three
climate scenarios over the different time horizons, using the
changes in average global surface temperature as a proxy for our
weightings (see page 48, Table 16).
Acute Physical Impacts to Operations
Our analysis of the potential physical impacts to our operations,
network and value chain are built from our case study assessment.
We examined the revenue performance of branches in locations
affected by recent significant natural events. Using the event as
the centre point, we analysed performance in the six months
before and after the event.
Revenue figures included freight, both originating in, or
destined for, the affected area, for both the Transport and Air &
Ocean business units (Warehousing is considered indirectly as
flowing in or out of these activities). The performance was then
compared to that of the wider operating region, with regional
revenue growth subtracted from the impacted area growth to
produce our operating percentage difference.
While the results have been largely consistent over the past
three years, and provide useful insights, we note that the
analysis is subject to a high degree of uncertainty. This reflects
the relatively small sample size and the influence of broader
economic and operational factors that may affect revenue
performance independently of physical climate events.
Chronic Physical Impacts to Operations
Modelling of chronic physical risk was derived from our natural
and climate hazard assessment, using the event probability by
branch averaged across each region. The average figure was
then interpreted using the probability mapping on p a g e 47,
Table 13, with results ranging from Negligible to Very High.
Transition Impacts – Technology Adoption
The technology adoption model estimates the incremental cost
of transitioning to lower emissions transport technologies across
air, sea, and road operations. It focuses on the uptake of key
technologies such as Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF), Sustainable
Maritime Fuels (SMF), and Heavy Electric Vehicles (HEV).
Inputs include projected activity spend by transport mode,
assumed annual uptake rates for each technology, and a cost
premium compared to conventional fuels or vehicles. The model
calculates the additional cost arising from adoption, then applies
recovery assumptions (for example, the extent to which costs can
be passed through to customers). Climate scenarios are applied
using weightings determined by modelled changes in carbon
price.
Transition Impacts – Competitive Positioning
The competitive positioning model assesses how differences
in climate ambition may create both downside risk and upside
opportunity. From a risk perspective, it estimates potential revenue
loss where customers prefer lower emissions providers and act on
that basis. From an opportunity perspective, it models potential
revenue growth where sustainability leadership enables market
share gains.
The model uses projected Group revenue, assumptions about the
proportion of revenue influenced by sustainability considerations,
and different strategic pathways (Ambitious, Balanced, and
Conservative). Each pathway applies different investment levels
and retention or conversion assumptions. Impacts are calculated
annually and summarised over time horizons. Competitive
positioning is highly sensitive to changes in revenue at risk or new
market share capture, as a result we have presented it as a range
between both transition risk and a transition opportunity.
Note, the strategic pathways focus on different courses of action
and levels of investment that could be made by Mainfreight. This
differs with the macroeconomic climate scenario analysis applied
to our other risks using weightings like carbon price or temperature
change.
Models & Methodologies
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 38

Almost all forms of prediction in complex systems involve
a high degree of uncertainty. Extending such analysis over
multiple decades, while accounting for climate science,
geopolitics, energy dynamics, technological development,
and market sentiment, is especially challenging. While
prediction itself is difficult, it is not the primary objective of
our work. Rather, our focus is on establishing the processes,
tools and models needed to continuously incorporate new
information, refine assumptions and support preparedness
across a range of potential future outcomes.
We have made considerable effort to draw on independent
data sources and external reviews when developing
our approach. Assumptions and model mechanics have
been documented clearly to enable scrutiny, testing,
and improvement over time, and we continue to validate
modelled impacts against observed experience. Of our
physical risk models, we consider estimates of physical
impacts to assets to be more robust, reflecting the use
of externally sourced datasets and a large volume of
underlying data. By contrast, estimates of physical impacts
to operations rely on a smaller, internally generated dataset
and therefore carry a higher degree of uncertainty.
A further limitation relates to regional variation in both
growth trajectories and climate-related impacts. The annual
compounding growth rate applied in the models (7%)
and the assessment of transition risks are assumed at the
Group level, and applied proportionately across regions. In
practice, regional outcomes are likely to vary significantly.
Future iterations of this reporting may explore more granular
regional analysis, subject to the availability of reliable data.
Physical risk models also assume that current insurance
arrangements and coverage terms remain unchanged.
This assumption may not hold in all cases, as insurance
becomes prohibitively expensive, or even unavailable, in
certain locations. Such changes would affect model outputs;
however, we anticipate that other forms of mitigation may be
able to accommodate some of the difference.
Transition risks and opportunities have been quantified on a
financial impact basis for the first time in this report. Among
our transition risks, Technology Adoption and Competitive
Positioning are both viewed as highly uncertain, with
sensitivity to many external dependencies, and limited
ability to directly validate outcomes. For example, being
able to distinguish revenue that is directly connected to
sustainability performance.
Despite the limitations, we believe the information
contained within this report to be consistent with the needs
and purposes of primary users.
Assumptions, Limitations
& Uncertainty
Transition Planning
Achieving a successful transition to a low carbon economy requires broad societal adoption. To do that, it must be just, equitable
and leave no one group behind. The same principle applies to our customers, and the broader supply chain. As global and
domestic economies transition toward a low emission future, Mainfreight’s aim is to provide solutions to customers at all levels
and ambitions on their decarbonisation journeys. Accessibility, flexibility and ultimately, progress, is our intention.
Mainfreight’s transition plan is centred around the process of change rather than an envisioned endpoint. We apply
the same rolling five year planning framework used for other strategic and capital related business decisions, including
consideration of financial and capital flows. This approach allows our transition responses to scale with technology
maturity, customer demand and regulatory development, while avoiding premature overinvestment ahead of practical
uptake. The environmental and climate components of this plan, along with performance to date, are provided on
page 45, Figure 12.
Our transition planning is structured around three strategic pillars: Responsiveness, Embodied Resilience, and Innovation and
Collaboration. These are designed to accommodate change and uncertainty, while providing a framework to address and adapt
to climate-related risks and opportunities. Collectively, these support our strategy to deliver:
·
Reduced fleet emissions through efficiency, optimisation and the transition to low emission vehicles.
·
Reduced operational emissions through renewable energy generation, storage, efficiency and electrification of our
operations.
·
Greater uptake of low emission alternate fuels for aviation and shipping.
·
Resilient and future-proofed facilities, and an adaptive transport network.
·
Industry leading emissions visibility to support customer decision making.
For further detail on our progress against the goals, priorities and initiatives underpinning these strategic pillars, refer to the
‘Our Sustainability & Climate Goals’ section of this report.
Our scenario analysis reflects the challenge and uncertainty, but also opportunity posed by climate change and climate
responses. We believe our approach remains consistent with managing for each of our scenarios and time horizons based on
the current context and outlook. Where signals and emerging understanding lend themselves toward one scenario over others,
pace, priority and associated capital deployment will be adjusted accordingly.
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 39

Responsiveness
Responsiveness reflects our focus on remaining nimble and
relevant as technologies, regulations and customer expectations
continue to evolve. Rather than attempting to predict specific
outcomes, our approach emphasises testing a range of solutions
and scaling those that prove effective as customer needs emerge.
In response to expanding global climate reporting requirements,
we have acted early and comprehensively, obtaining assurance
over all GHG inventories since 2018 and publishing our first Climate
Risk Report in 2023.
Our aim is not only to meet our obligations, but to exceed them by
using our disclosures to improve engagement with stakeholders,
and support our position as a resource and trusted partner to our
customers. Our responsiveness strategy is centred on building
agility and clear decision making at all levels of the business,
enabling us to respond quickly and effectively to the impacts and
opportunities of the global transition.
Priorities:
·
Meet all mandatory climate disclosure requirements in the
regions we operate.
·
Leverage digitisation and analytics to optimise energy use, fleet
planning and ‘right-sizing’ of renewable assets.
·
Futureproof our facilities to accommodate greater future
energy needs and operational demands.
·
Improve intermodal connectivity.
Current Initiatives:
·
Compliance with the Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards.
·
Compliance with the California Climate-Related Financial Risk
Act and the Climate Corporate Data Accountability Act.
·
Compliance with Australian Accounting Standards Board
Climate-related Disclosures Standard.
·
Preparing for the European Corporate Sustainability Reporting
Directive by 2028.
·
New energy management platforms rolled out in New Zealand
and the Americas.
·
Accommodation for additional solar and battery storage being
added to new facilities.
·
We continue to facilitate rail, coastal and inland waterway
connections.
Embodied Resilience
We recognise that design and investment decisions made
today directly influence the resilience and adaptability of our
operations tomorrow. While we can’t predict the future, we can
prepare for different versions of it.
In recent years, our network has supported customers through
floods, bushfires, earthquakes, global supply chain disruptions
and a pandemic. Our capacity to respond quickly and re-
establish critical supply chains, in days if not hours, has seen our
business grow bigger, better and more resilient.
This operational flexibility extends to repurposing assets,
establishing temporary facilities, shifting freight between modes
(including rail and coastal shipping), and creating new local
operating capacity where required.
Priorities:
·
Increase renewable energy generation and storage.
·
Build water resilience and responsible consumption
practices.
·
Maintain a decentralised, adaptive freight network.
·
Mitigate climate risks to assets and customers’ freight.
·
Enable fleet and operational electrification.
Current Initiatives:
·
Solar generation - now at over 12.0MW (up 28% on 2025).
·
Site batteries (BESS) – now at 11.8MWh (up 21% on 2025).
·
Extensive car and truck charging infrastructure – up to 480kW
DC.
·
Rainwater capture, storage and filtration.
·
Greywater capture and storage for truck wash and ablutions.
·
Raised docks and racking – keeping our customers’ freight
further from flood risks.
·
Climate and natural hazard risk assessment undertaken
before commissioning any new builds.
·
Further exploration of mitigation measures in higher risk
areas.
Innovation and Collaboration
Transportation and logistics remain among the hardest sectors to
decarbonise. Meaningful progress will depend on a combination of
practical, incremental gains and genuinely new, creative solutions.
Mainfreight’s Innovation and Collaboration strategy is built on
connection. Connecting emerging technologies with real-world
applications, and bringing together partners across the value chain
around a common purpose and benefit.
Priorities:
·
Improve fleet efficiency and support the transition to low
emissions vehicles.
·
Enable customer access to sustainable aviation and maritime
fuels.
·
Electrify operational equipment and light vehicles.
·
Expand customer use of emissions tracking and
visibility tools.
·
Explore emerging energy systems such as microgrids,
virtual power plants and bidirectional charging.
Current Initiatives:
·
Continued fleet modernisation.
·
Deployment of heavy electric trucks (40+ to date).
·
Electrification of material handling equipment (>85%).
·
Transition of small vehicle fleet to electric and hybrid.
·
Route optimisation and planning tools.
·
Advanced customer emissions analytics.
·
Pilots of sustainable aviation and maritime fuel options.
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 40

The following summary of metrics relating to Mainfreight’s GHG emissions has been measured in accordance with the Greenhouse
Gas Protocol – A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard, the GHG Protocol Corporate Value Chain (Scope 3) Accounting and
Reporting Standard, and the GHG Protocol Scope 2 Guidance. Emissions are reported across Scope 1, Scope 2 and relevant Scope 3
categories as defined by the GHG Protocol. All figures refer to metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e), unless otherwise
stated.
We have sought to apply the latest available global warming potentials (GWPs) from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC) Sixth Assessment Report (AR6). Where underlying emission factors are based on earlier GWPs, adjustments have been made
where practicable to align with AR6.
Mainfreight has not applied an internal carbon price during the reporting period, therefore, for the purposes of these disclosures, this
may be considered as $0. Remuneration policies do not directly incorporate performance against emissions metrics or targets.
For a detailed breakdown of prior years’ emission factors, methodologies, assumptions, boundaries, exclusions, uncertainties and
year-on-year trends, readers are referred to our 2018-2025 GHG Inventory Reports. These reports, along with previous disclosures are
available via the link below.
www.mainfreight.com/global/en-nz/investor/reports-library/sustainability-information
Metrics & Targets
ScopeCategory2026 FY2025 FY2024 FY
1Direct GHG Emissions372 ,615340,037303,309
2Electricity Indirect GHG Emissions (Location-based)18,68318, 56116,798
3Other Indirect GHG Emissions1,219,1101,298,2831,170 , 6 49
Category 2Capital goods
33,84026, 241-
Category 3Fuel- and energy-related activities not included
in Scope 1 or Scope 2
91,97489,49379,141
Category 5Waste generated in operations
3, 3136,6799,4 4 0
Category 6Business travel
4,4088,4654,390
Category 9Downstream transportation and distribution
1,085,5751,167, 4 0 51, 07 7, 678
Tot al
tCO2e
1,610,408 1,656,8811,490,756
Table 9. GHG Inventory in tCO2e
Mainfreight applies an operational control approach to define its organisational reporting boundary. Unlike financial control, which is
determined by ownership, operational control reflects where the Group has the authority to direct activities and influence environmental
performance. This aligns the reporting boundary with how the Group manages its operations and supports consistent application of
emissions accounting policies and reduction initiatives.
All emission sources under Mainfreight’s direct financial control are included, as are material sources where we lack direct control, most
notably emissions from our Owner Driver network. No material facilities, operations or assets, including those recently completed, have
been excluded.
In 2026 FY, Mainfreight transitioned from reporting under ISO 14064-1:2018 to the GHG Protocol. This change aligns our reporting
with evolving regulatory expectations, including the Australian climate-related disclosure requirements. Adoption of the GHG Protocol
reflects prevailing market practice and improves the comparability, transparency, and regulatory alignment of the Group’s emissions
reporting across jurisdictions.
Where possible we have used supplier specific data, where supplier specific data is unavailable, we have used aggregated modelled
inputs from our Transport Management Systems. In two categories we have applied spend based methods. For a detailed breakdown
of our data sources, methodologies and the associated uncertainties please see Table 12 on pages 46–47.
For the 2026 financial year, we have recorded a modest 46,473
tonne reduction in gross CO2e emissions, representing a 2.8%
decrease compared to 2025.
Improvements in efficiency and associated emission factors,
particularly for air freight, have contributed to the reduction,
despite an increase in freight task across all transport modes.
Previously, older data and the impacts of COVID-19 on air
freight load factors contributed to elevated air freight emission
factors that have now been updated. This reflects both better
utilisation and a gradually modernising international fleet. The
effect of SAF mandates is negligible in the recent update, but is
expected to play a larger role in future iterations.
Sea freight has realised marginal improvements in trade-lane
based emission factors, but a significant increase in volume has
seen our sea-based emissions grow year on year. We continue
to account for ongoing disruption in the Red Sea, which has
increased the distance travelled by vessels on impacted routes,
contributing approximately 10,000 tonnes of additional CO2e.
Rail has seen a notable uplift, attributable to a new method
of accounting for the landside connections on international
movements that were previously excluded. However, given
rail’s relative efficiency, we are strong advocates for greater use
of this mode where it is available, and would tend to view growth
in this category (where it reflects modal shift) as positive. Road-
based emissions would have been largely flat year on year,
except for a shift toward more conservative emission factors
for European road freight which added approximately 30,000
tonnes CO2e.
Overall, we are encouraged by continued reductions across
each of our tracked intensity measures, reflective of business
growth alongside a modest reduction in gross emissions.
Future performance will continue to balance our growth and
market share capture against our capacity to find improvements
in efficiency and pursue opportunities for decarbonisation.
Reporting Boundary, Methodologies and Uncertainties
Comparative Analysis
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 41

Emission Categories
GHG Emission Source Exclusions
Assurance
Tonnes CO2e
Emissions Source2026 FY2025 FY2024 FY
Road5 07,12 6 4 67, 59 3 4 09, 331
Rail17, 817 9,092 9, 3 0 5
Inland Waterway5,701 ––
Sea181,634 161, 6 89 14 4,099
Air820,789 942,542 880,806
Total Freight Emissions1,533,067 1,580,916 1,443,541
Direct Operational Emissions7 7, 3 41 75,965 47, 215
Total Emissions1,610,408 1,656,881 1,490,756
Direct Operational Emissions % of Total4.80%4.58%3 .17 %
kgs CO2e
Intensity Factors2026 FY2025 FY% Change
Emissions per tonne kilometre of Domestic
Freight (Road/Rail/Inland Waterway)
0.0830.091-8.8%
Emissions per tonne kilometre of Air Freight1.0001.19 9-16.6%
Emissions per TEU kilometre of Sea Freight0.0560.058-3.4%
Scope
1Includes direct GHG emissions from sources that we own or control. This includes the fuel
used in vehicles we own or lease, gas used for heating and cooking and fugitive emissions
from refrigerant leakage. Emissions are calculated using an activity-based method.
2Includes indirect GHG emissions from the generation of electricity we purchase, calculated
using supplier-based activity data and location-based emission factors (EFs).
3Refers to all other material indirect emissions across Mainfreight’s value chain.
These include:
Category 2 Capital goods
Category 3 Fuel- and energy-related activities (not included in scope 1 or scope 2)
Category 5 Waste generated in operations
Category 6 Business travel
Category 9 Downstream transportation and distribution
Excluded Scope 3 Categories
1Purchased goods and services11Use of sold products
4Upstream transportation and distribution12End-of-life treatment of sold products
7Employee commuting13Downstream leased assets
8Upstream leased assets14Franchises
10Processing of sold products15Investments
Screening methods used high level assessments based on estimated activity data and with
highly conservative assumptions to determine that the below sources do not meet our materiality
thresholds for inclusion, in that:
·
They collectively cover less than 5% of Mainfreight’s total emissions.
·
No single source would account for more than 1% of Mainfreight’s total emissions.
Exclusions include:
Scope 1: Excludes emissions from welding in our small number of on site workshops, as well as
fugitive emissions from air conditioning systems and chilled transport refrigeration.
Scope 2: Excludes emissions from charging electric vehicles offsite.
Scope 3: Excludes emissions from customer consumables, composting, wastewater, pre and post
carriage transport (including couriers from our warehouses), well-to-tank electricity and waste from
a small number of air and ocean offices. We also exclude the remaining Scope 3 categories in their
entirety:
The greenhouse gas emissions and related disclosures for the year ending 31 March 2026 have
been subject to limited assurance by EY. Refer to EY’s Assurance Report on pages 50 to 51. Toitū
Envirocare provided reasonable and limited assurance for the comparative GHG emissions and
related disclosures for the years ended 31 March 2024 and 31 March 2025.
Categories not covered in Mainfreight’s GHG emissions inventory are reviewed annually and may
be included in future disclosures if they become material or if more specific activity data becomes
available.
Table 10. GHG Mode Split in tCO2e
Table 11. Intensity Factors in kgCO2e
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 42

2019 CY
1,800,000
1,600,000
1,400,000
1,200,000
1,000,000
2020 CY2021 CY2022 CY2024 FY2025 FY2026 FY
Emissions
Categories
Split
Emissions
Gas Split
Hydrofluorocarbon
HFC
0.21%
Scope 2
1.16%
Scope 1
23.14%
Scope 3
75.70%
Nitrous Oxide
N2O
1.40%
Methane
CH4
0.16%
Carbon Dioxide
CO2
98.23%
Figure 7. Gross Emissions Trend TrackingFigure 10. Freight Mode Split
Figure 11. Emissions
Regional Split in tCO2e
Figure 8.
Emissions Categories Split
Figure 9.
Emissions Gas Split
Gross Emissions Trend Tracking
Emissions Regional Split
Sea
Road
Inland
Waterway
Rail
Air
9, 305
200,000400,000600,000800,0001,000,000
144,099
409, 331
2026 FY
2025 FY
2024 FY
880,806
161,689
4 67, 59 3
942,542
181,634
5 07,12 6
820,789
9,092
5,701
17, 817
Freight Mode Split
Asia
13,004
America
50,456
Australia
219, 363
New Zealand
180,676
Europe
135,064
Emissions (tCO2e)
Emissions (tCO2e)
Ocean: 181,146
Air: 820,783
Other Modes: 9,916
International
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 43

On page 45, Figure 12 we have outlined a number of our sustainability focused goals over the
coming five years, including fleet electrification, solar generation and battery storage among
others. While we consider these to be important mitigation measures toward our climate efforts, we
would not classify these as climate-related targets.
Mainfreight has not set gross emissions reduction targets or science based targets, and is not
required to do so under applicable regulations. Instead, our climate-related targets are based on
continuous improvement across three tracked intensity measures:
Emissions per tonne kilometre of domestic freight (road/rail/inland waterway)
The sum of all emissions, including direct (Scope 1) and indirect (Scope 3), across domestic transport
modes of road, rail and inland waterway divided by the total freight activity in tonne kilometres that
used these modes.
Emissions per tonne kilometre of air freight
The sum of all air freight emissions (indirect, Scope 3) divided by the total air freight activity in tonne
kilometres.
Emissions per TEU kilometre of sea freight
The sum of all sea freight emissions (indirect, Scope 3) divided by the total sea freight activity
measured in TEU (twenty-foot equivalent unit) kilometres.
These targets may be interpreted as having a base year of 2025 and a time horizon of one year, with
targets reset in each new reporting period. We have been tracking these intensity measures in their
current format since 2024. These targets are not validated by any third party.
Progress against targets, shown in Table 11, is monitored in each reporting period. For the current
year, we observed an 8.8% reduction in our domestic freight intensity factor, a 16.6% reduction in
our air freight intensity factor, and a 3.4% reduction in our sea freight intensity factor.
These improvements were driven by efficiency gains and updated emission factors, particularly in
air freight, where revised data now reflects improved utilisation and fleet modernisation. Sea freight
saw modest efficiency gains, partly offset by external disruptions such as the Red Sea rerouting,
while road and rail outcomes were influenced by updated methodologies. Overall, reductions in
intensity reflect ongoing operational improvements alongside business growth.
Our efforts to date are consistent with a strategy of continuous improvement across our tracked
intensity measures, and our overall approach to mitigation. We believe this strategy remains well
suited to deliver future improvements aligned with our current intensity targets.
Our targets are set, tracked and managed at the Group level. At this stage, intensity-based targets
remain our priority, supporting continued business growth without increasing overall impact.
We continue to evaluate the potential value of additional longer-term targets, including absolute
targets, and will disclose any changes in future reporting periods.
The determination of whether an organisation’s emissions targets are consistent with limiting
global warming to 1.5°C is, in our view, highly uncertain. Recent surface temperature observations
indicate that this threshold may already have been exceeded. At present, our position is that we lack
sufficient data to determine whether or not our targets or any alternate targets under consideration
are consistent with the goal of containing global warming to 1.5°C.
Offsets are not included nor intended to form part of our decarbonisation strategy and associated
targets.
Target s
Mainfreight anticipates total capital expenditure of approximately $234 million through to March
2027. This investment will support the continued expansion and modernisation of our network,
facilities, technology, and infrastructure. A number of these initiatives will directly contribute to
our climate mitigation activities, while also strengthening self sufficiency, resilience and adaptive
capacity across the business.
In practice, capital deployment often serves multiple strategic objectives. Many investments that
support climate outcomes are primarily driven by broader business needs. For example, network
expansion is central to our growth strategy, while also reducing exposure to acute physical climate
risks through increased geographic diversification and operational flexibility. Likewise, investments
such as rooftop solar generation deliver emissions reductions alongside financial returns. As
a result, it is not easy or practical to isolate or quantify capital expenditure that relates solely to
climate risk mitigation or adaptation.
The association between Mainfreight’s strategic planning and capital deployment to our climate
time horizons is outlined below.
Short Term (Present – 2030): Aligned with our current five year strategy planning roadmap,
including immediate capital deployment to enhance resilience and progress emissions reduction
initiatives.
Medium Term (2031 – 2040): Corresponds to the next two strategic planning cycles and reflects
anticipated advances and tipping points in low-emissions transport and logistics technologies.
Long Term (2041 – 2050): An extended period encapsulating several strategic planning cycles
and aligned with among the most widely used target dates for both corporate target-setting and
Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
Capital, Planning and Climate-related Impacts
We are committed to continually enhancing the inputs, models and, ultimately, the insights that
underpin our climate-related risk reporting, for both internal decision-makers and other interested
stakeholders.
In addition to meeting the disclosure requirements set out in the Aotearoa New Zealand Climate
Standards, we aim to publish information that aligns with key reporting principles: relevance,
accuracy, verifiability, comparability, consistency, timeliness, balance, understandability,
completeness, and coherence.
As we continue to develop and strengthen our climate reporting capabilities, we have identified
several key workstreams:
·
Incorporating emerging scientific research and climate data into the ongoing refinement of our
scenario analysis.
·
Transitioning to rolling time horizons in our scenario analysis and planning processes to ensure
assumptions and projections remain current and responsive to evolving climate data and
business conditions.
·
Further evaluating and developing climate-related targets.
·
Expanding the collection of case studies to support our physical impacts assessment year on
year.
·
Analysing emerging trends and aligning them with our transition planning.
·
Progressing alignment with the European Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive.
·
Reviewing and aligning, where appropriate, with other global, state, and industry reporting
frameworks.
Next Steps
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 44

2028
Our sustainability goals are set out within the Five Year Roadmaps presented in Mainfreight’s Annual
Report, alongside the business’ broader strategic priorities. Reflecting the materiality of climate change,
these goals are primarily focused on decarbonising our operations and transportation activities, while
selected initiatives, such as investments in renewable energy and water capture and storage, also
contribute to improved resilience.
Collectively, the goals are intended to drive practical emissions reductions through fleet electrification,
expanded renewable energy infrastructure, and the introduction of lower emissions transport solutions,
while also enabling customers to measure, understand, and reduce their own emissions.
While the roadmap sets clear directional priorities, it is not exhaustive, and Mainfreight will continue to
pursue additional initiatives and solutions across its network as opportunities arise.
Mainfreight Sustainability Goals
Context for Sustainability and Climate Goals
Renewable Assets - generation and storage:
These now contribute roughly 17% (up from 14%) of our total electricity supply globally, with an
additional 32% (down from 34%) covered by Renewable Energy Certificates and the remaining
51% using local grids (down from 52%).
Fleet - trucks, forklifts and small fleet:
Low emission vehicles represent over 1.5% of our heavy fleet (up from 1.4%). 89.3% of our
material handling equipment is now electric (up from 86.4%) and hybrids and electric vehicles
make up 62.2% of our small fleet (up from 54.1%).
Emission intensity factors declineAchieved: All factors reduced
Water collection on all owned sitesUnderway: Yes on new owned sites, others will
follow as they are refurbished
Solar power across as many sites as possibleAchieved: Approximately 3.0MW added and, we
expect further growth
Carbon Tracking Technology used by
1,500+ customers
Achieved: Now used extensively, with our
Carbon Calculator also enabled for all users
All freight terminals feature fast charging and
support EV charging
Underway: EV charging is now standard,
widespread fast charging will take more time
Primary (carrier and aircraft specific) emission
factors applied for international shipments
Underway: Likely between 2027 and 2028
Electric vehicles in all
Transport branches
Unlikely, supply and cost
remain barriers
Hydrogen vehicle options
trialled
Possible, hydrogen expected
to be a niche solution
International solar arrays

reach 12 .5MW
Ver y likely
International site battery
capacity exceeds

15.0MWh
Possible, but will require
contributions outside of
Australia
Static batteries join solar
arrays and water capture as
standard design features for
new Mainfreight sites
Continued development of
Carbon Tracking Technology
alongside machine learning
and AI adoption
Small vehicle fleet 75%
hybrid and electric
Zero emission linehaul implemented
International solar arrays exceed 20.0MW
Zero Emissions fleet grows to 100+ vehicles
SAF and low-emission maritime fuels integrated into
customer offerings
Carbon Tracking software formally accredited
Over 10% of all metro transportation served by
Zero Emission Vehicles
International solar arrays exceed 25.0MW
SAF and low-emission maritime fuels achieve
2% customer uptake
International site battery capacity exceeds 25.0MWh
All new freight terminals feature major charging hubs
98% of Material Handling Equipment electric
GOALSPROGRESSGOALSPROGRESS
GOALSGOALSGOALS
GOALS
Figure 12. Sustainability Goals
2027
2031
2026
20292030
Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information 45

SCOPE 1
SCOPE 2
SCOPE 3
Mobile
combustion
Fossil fuel used in Group
owned and leased vehicles
Invoices provided by fuel
suppliers
Low
Fuel-based method. Fuel consumption (litres) per fuel type is sourced
from fuel card data and transaction reports.
DCCEEW [2025] AR6, DESNZ [2025]
AR6, EPA [2025] AR6, MfE [2025]
AR6
Transport Management
System
Moderate level of uncertainty
due to relying on aggregated,
modelled inputs rather than
direct fuel use.
Distance-based method. Tonne-kilometres (tkm) of diesel where
Mainfreight is the carrier, based on known vehicle classes.
AusLCI [V1.42] AR5, GLEC [V3.2]
AR6
Fuel supplier invoices/
Odometer readings
High level of uncertainty as
the spend-based approach
is applied where unable to
provide activity data.
Hybrid (distance and spend) method. Litres and mileage reimbursed
for distance travelled in a team member's own petrol vehicle.
DCCEEW [2025] AR6, DESNZ [2025]
Fossil fuel used in Group
owned and leased forklifts
Invoices provided by fuel
suppliers
Low
Fuel-based method. LPG (kgs) and diesel (L) consumption is sourced
from invoices.
MfE [2025] AR6, DCCEEW [2025]
AR6
Stationary
combustion
Gas used for heating and
cooking in Group owned
and leased equipment and
buildings
Gas provider invoices/
meter readings
Low
Fuel-based method. Natural gas (m3, L) quantities are sourced from
invoices.
DCCEEW [2025] AR6, DESNZ [2025]
AR6, MfE [2025] AR6
Fugitive
emissions
Refrigerant used in owned
and leased chillers and
temperature-controlled
depots
Supplier data and
Maintenance records
Moderate – High level of
uncertainty given a reliance
on team to report.
Top-up method. Kilograms of any refrigerants which have leaked
from a chilled facility (see exclusions for air conditioning). Fugitive
emissions calculated using refrigerant top-up quantities (kgs) per
refrigerant type sourced from maintenance contractors, and invoices.
Refrigerant top-ups are completed on an ad hoc basis. Mainfreight
does not monitor top-ups. Data comes through on-site team
knowledge and supplier data where available.
IPCC Global Warming Potential
Values AR6
Refrigerant types: R407F, R404a,
R134 a
Category 2
Capital Goods
Construction Projects
Fixed Asset Summary -
Additions
High level of uncertainty as
the spend-based approach
is applied where unable to
provide activity data.
Spend-based method.
thinkstep-anz [2024] AR6, EPA
Supply Chain [V1.4.0] AR6
Category 3

Fuel- and
energy-related
activities
Electricity and natural
gas transmission and
distribution losses
Invoices provided by fuel
suppliers
Low
Average-data method. Emissions from T&D losses are estimated
based on Scope 2 data.
AEMO [2026] |AR6, DESNZ [2025]
AR6, EPA [2025] AR6, MfE [2025]
AR6, World Bank [2025]
Well-to-tank (WTT) losses
Invoices provided by fuel
suppliers
Low
Average-data method. Emissions from WTT (Scope 3) losses are
estimated based on Scope 1 data.
DESNZ [2025] AR5
CategoryEmission Source/ActivityData SourceUncertaintyCalculation Methodology & Assumptions
Emission Factor and GWP

(as described in Table 17)
Electricity
Electricity used in
owned and leased
sites – including offices,
distribution centres,
branches, and depots
Electricity provider
invoices/meter readings
LowLocation-based method. Total kilowatt-hours of electricity used.
CO2 emissiefactoren [2025] AR6,
DCCEEW [2025] AR5, DESNZ [2025]
AR6, EPA [2025] AR6, IEA [2026],
MfE [2025] AR6
Table 12. Emissions Data Sources
Data & Model Source Tables
Additional Information
46Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

SCOPE 3
Category 4
Upstream
Transportation
and
Distribution
Third-party road freight
Transport Management
System
Moderate level of uncertainty
due to relying on aggregated,
modelled inputs rather than
direct fuel use.
Distance-based method. Tonne kilometres of diesel used for all road
transport where Mainfreight is not the carrier. Emissions from third-
party road freight, calculated through transport management systems
based on vehicle classes.
AusLCI [V1.42] AR5, DESNZ [2025]
AR5, EPA [2025] AR6, MfE [2025]
AR6, GLEC [V3.2] AR6
Supplier invoicesLow
Fuel-based method. Fuel consumption (L) of fuel type used by third-
party road freight carriers.
EPA [2025] AR6
Third-party non-road
freight
Transport Management
System
Moderate level of uncertainty
due to relying on aggregated,
modelled inputs rather than
direct fuel use.
Distance-based method. Rail, coastal shipping and air payload
distance data from our Transport Management System.
EPA [2025] AR6, CC [2025] AR6,
DESNZ [2025] AR6, KiwiRail [2026],
MfE [2025] AR6,
Category 5

Waste
Generated in
Operations
Landfill and Recycling
Data provided by waste
companies
Low
Supplier-specific method. Tonnes of non-recyclable and recyclable
waste collected from branches.
DCCEEW [2025] AR5, DESNZ [2025]
AR5, EPA [2025] AR5, MfE [2025]
AR6
Category 6

Business
Travel
A ir Tr avel
Data provided by
suppliers
Moderate level of uncertainty
due to relying on aggregated,
modelled inputs rather than
direct fuel use.
Distance-based method. Distance passenger travelled, aircraft size
and class travelled in. Spend-based method for <1%.
DESNZ [2025] AR6, EPA [2025] AR6,
Corporate Traveller [2024] AR5, EPA
Supply Chain [V1.4.0] AR6
Accommodation
Data provided by
suppliers
Moderate level of uncertainty
due to relying on aggregated,
modelled inputs.
Activity-based method. Using the numbers of nights stayed in a
location and hotel star rating. Spend-based method for <1%.
CHSB Tool [2026] AR6, Corporate
Traveller [2024] AR5, EPA Supply
Chain [V1.4.0] AR6
Rental Cars
Data provided by
suppliers
Moderate level of uncertainty
due to relying on aggregated,
modelled inputs rather than
direct fuel use.
Distance-based method. Datasets and invoices provided by rental
companies/odometer readings. Spend-based method for <1%.
Corporate Traveller [2024] AR5, EPA
Supply Chain [V1.4.0] AR6
CategoryEmission Source/ActivityData SourceUncertaintyCalculation Methodology & Assumptions
Emission Factor and GWP

(as described in Table 17)
Probability
Fluvial
Flood
WildfireWindstorm
Storm
Surge
DroughtPrecipitation
Sea Level
Rise
0.01%Outside
No Data/
Negligible
Outside
Negligible/
Extremely
Low
No Change
No
Change
0 .10 %Very LowVery LowVery Low
Very Low
Increase/
Decrease
Very Low
Increase
0.20%ModerateLowLow500 yearsLow
Low Increase/
Decrease
Low
Increase
0.33%Moderate
0.40%ModerateModerate250 yearsMedium
Moderate
Decrease
Moderate
Increase
0.50%SignificantSignificantSignificantSignificant
1.00%HighHighHigh100 yearsHighHigh Decrease
High
Increase
2.00%Very HighVery High50 yearsVery High
Very High
Increase
10.00%Extreme
DivisionXSSMLXL
Leased
A&O10,000 50,000 250,000 1,000,000 2,000,000
Carotrans10,000 50,000 250,000 1,000,000 2,000,000
TPT500,000 1,000,000 2,500,000 5,000,000 10,000,000
WHS500,000 1,000,000 2,500,000 5,000,000 10,000,000
WHF500,000 1,000,000 2,500,000 5,000,000 10,000,000
Owned
A&O1,000,000 2,000,000 5,000,000 10,000,000 20,000,000
Carotrans1,000,000 2,000,000 5,000,000 10,000,000 20,000,000
TPT5,000,000 10,000,000 25,000,000 50,000,000 100,000,000
WHS5,000,000 10,000,000 25,000,000 50,000,000 100,000,000
WHF5,000,000 10,000,000 25,000,000 50,000,000 100,000,000
Table 13. Event Probability Translation
Table 14. Generalised Asset (Branch) Valuations (NZ$)
Table 12. Emissions Data Sources (continued)
47Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

EventsTypeLeased ExposureOwned Exposure
Fluvial FloodAcute40%20%
WildfireAcute5%10%
WindstormAcute1%1%
Storm SurgeAcute40%20%
DroughtChronic0.01%0.01%
PrecipitationChronic0.01%0.01%
Sea Level RiseChronic0.01%0.01%
SURFACE TEMPERATURE (°K)MAGICCv7.5.3|67.0th Percentile
Time HorizonYear
Smooth Transition

(Net Zero)
Delayed Transition
Business as Usual

(Current Policies)
Short Term20301.641.651.65
M edium Ter m20401.771.911.95
Long Term20501.741.982.21
Scenario/

Time Multipliers
Medium/Short Term1.081.171.19
Long/Short Term1.061.211.35
Table 15. Event Impact Assumptions
Table 16. Scenario Global Surface Temperature Changes
Table 17. Emissions Factor and GWP Sources
AbbreviationProviderSource
CC [2025]Clean Cargo Integration Tool (login)https://clean-cargo.report/
Corporate Traveller [2024]Emission Reporting Methodologyhttps://www.corptraveller.com/en-gb/what-we-do/sustainable-business-travel
DCCEEW [2025]National Greenhouse Accounts Factors: 2025
https://www.dcceew.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/national-greenhouse-account-
factors-2025.pdf
DESNZ [2025]Conversion factors 2025: full set (for advanced users)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/greenhouse-gas-reporting-conversion-
factors-2025
EPA [2025]2025 GHG Emission Factors Hubhttps://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2025-01/ghg-emission-factors-hub-2025.pdf
EPA Supply Chain [V1.4.0]Supply Chain Greenhouse Gas Emission Factors for U.S. Commoditieshttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17202747
GLEC [V3.2]Global Logistics Emissions Council Framework V3.2
https://smart-freight-centre-media.s3.amazonaws.com/documents/GLEC_FRAMEWORK_
v3.2_21_10_25_1.pdf
IE A [2026]CO2 intensity of electricity generation in selected regions, 2015-2030
https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/co2-intensity-of-electricity-generation-in-
selected-regions-2015-2030
KiwiRail [2026]KiwiRail Steel Wheels Reporthttps://www.kiwirailfreight.co.nz/rail-freight/sustainable-freight
MfE [2025]MfE Measuring Emissions: A guide for organisations - 2025https://measuringemissionsguide.environment.govt.nz/files_download.html
World Bank [2025]Electric power transmission and distribution losses (% of output) - https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EG.ELC.LOSS.ZS
AEMO [2026]Loss factors and regional boundaries
https://www.aemo.com.au/energy-systems/electricity/national-electricity-market-nem/
market-operations/loss-factors-and-regional-boundaries
AusLCI [V1.42]AusLCI Carbon Emission Factors V1.42https://www.auslci.com.au/index.php/EmissionFactors
CHSB Tool [2026]Cornell Hotel Sustainability Benchmarking Index 2026https://greenview.sg/resources/chsb-index/
CO2 emissiefactoren [2025]Reliable emission factors for businesses and consumers in the Netherlandshttps://co2emissiefactoren.nl/
IPCC Global Warming Potential ValuesIPCC Global Warming Potential Values
https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/2024-08/Global-Warming-Potential-Values%20
%28August%202024%29.pdf
thinkstep-anz [2024]Emission Factors for New Zealand
https://www.thinkstep-anz.com/assets/Whitepapers/GHG-Emission-Factors-for-New-
Zealand-Industries-and-Commodities-2024-v1.1.pdf
48Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

Pre-Insurance (Gross)
YearEstimated Annual LossCumulative LossS1

MultiplierCumulative

S1S2

MultiplierCumulative

S2S3MultiplierCumulative

S3
2024 188,754 188,754 1.00 188,754 1.00 188,754 1.00 188,754
2025 274, 651 463,406 1.00 463,406 1.00 463,406 1.00 463,406
2026 280,790 74 4 ,196 1.00 74 4 ,196 1.00 74 4 ,196 1.00 74 4 ,196
2027 300,446 1,04 4,642 1.00 1,04 4,642 1.00 1,04 4,642 1.00 1,04 4,642
2028 321,477 1, 3 6 6 ,119 1.00 1, 3 6 6 ,119 1.00 1, 3 6 6 ,119 1.00 1, 3 6 6 ,119
2029 343,980 1,710,099 1.00 1,710,099 1.00 1,710,099 1.00 1,710,099
2030 368,059 2, 078 ,158 1.08 2,248,905 1.17 2,427,473 1.19 2,479,424
2031 2,998,540 18,859,624 1.08 20,409,186 1.17 22,029,720 1.19 2 2, 501,187
2032 3,208,438 22,068,062 1.08 23,881,238 1.17 25,777,461 1.19 26 , 329,135
2033 3,433,028 25,501,090 1.08 2 7, 596 , 3 3 4 1.17 2 9, 787, 5 4 3 1.19 30,425,039
2034 3,673,340 29,174 , 4 31 1.08 31,571,487 1.17 34,078,332 1.19 34,807,656
2035 3,93 0,474 3 3,10 4 ,9 0 5 1.08 35,824,900 1.17 38,669,475 1.19 39,497,056
2036 4,205,607 37, 310 , 512 1.08 40, 376,052 1.17 43,581,999 1.19 44,514,715
2037 4,500,000 41, 810, 512 1.08 45,245,785 1.17 48,838,399 1.19 49,883,610
2038 4,815,000 4 6, 625, 512 1.08 50,456,400 1.17 5 4,4 62,74 8 1.19 55,628,327
2039 5,152, 0 50 51,777,562 1.08 56,031,757 1.17 60,480,800 1.19 61,775,175
2040 5, 512, 693 57,290,255 1.06 6 0,9 2 2,107 1.21 69,136 ,131 1.35 77,472,224
2041 5,898,582 63,188,837 1.06 67,194 , 6 2 3 1.21 76, 254, 359 1.35 85,448,734
2042 6 , 311, 4 8 3 69,500,319 1.06 73,906,215 1.21 83,870,863 1.35 93,983,599
2043 6,753,286 76,253,606 1.06 81, 0 87, 618 1.21 92,020,523 1.35 10 3 ,115 ,9 0 4
2044 7, 2 2 6 , 016 83,479,622 1.06 88,771,720 1.21 100,740,659 1.35 112 , 8 87, 471
2045 7, 7 31, 8 3 8 91, 211,459 1.06 96,993,708 1.21 110,071,205 1.35 123,343,048
2046 8,273,066 9 9,4 8 4, 526 1.06 105,791, 236 1.21 120,054,888 1.35 134,530,515
2047 8 , 8 52,181 108,336,706 1.06 115 , 2 0 4 , 591 1.21 130,737,430 1.35 14 6 , 501,10 4
2048 9,471, 8 33 117,808,540 1.06 125, 276,881 1.21 142,167,749 1.35 159, 3 09, 6 35
204910,13 4 , 8 62 12 7,94 3 , 4 0 2 1.06 136,054,231 1.21 15 4 , 398 ,191 1.35 173,014,763
Post-Insurance (Net)
YearEstimated Annual LossCumulative LossS1

MultiplierCumulative

S1S2

MultiplierCumulative

S2S3MultiplierCumulative

S3
2024 188,754 188,754 1.00 188,754 1.00 188,754 1.00 188,754
2025 274, 651 463,406 1.00 463,406 1.00 463,406 1.00 463,406
2026 280,790 74 4 ,196 1.00 74 4 ,196 1.00 74 4 ,196 1.00 74 4 ,196
2027 300,446 1,04 4,642 1.00 1,04 4,642 1.00 1,04 4,642 1.00 1,04 4,642
2028 321,477 1, 3 6 6 ,119 1.00 1, 3 6 6 ,119 1.00 1, 3 6 6 ,119 1.00 1, 3 6 6 ,119
2029 343,980 1,710,099 1.00 1,710,099 1.00 1,710,099 1.00 1,710,099
2030 368,059 2, 078 ,158 1.08 2,248,905 1.17 2,427,473 1.19 2,479,424
2031 393,823 2,471,981 1.08 2,675,086 1.17 2,887,493 1.19 2,949,290
2032 421,391 2,893,371 1.08 3,131, 0 9 9 1.17 3, 379,715 1.19 3,452,046
2033 450,888 3,344,259 1.08 3 , 619, 0 3 3 1.17 3,906,392 1.19 3,989,995
2034 482,450 3,826,709 1.08 4 ,141,123 1.17 4,4 69,937 1.19 4,565,600
2035 516,222 4,342,931 1.08 4, 69 9,759 1.17 5,072,930 1.19 5,181,498
2036 552,357 4,895,288 1.08 5,297,499 1.17 5,718 ,132 1.19 5,840,508
2037 591,022 5,486,310 1.08 5 ,9 37, 0 81 1.17 6,408,499 1.19 6,545,650
2038 632,394 6 ,118 ,70 4 1.08 6,621,434 1.17 7,147,19 1 1.19 7, 3 0 0 ,151
2039 676 , 6 61 6,795,365 1.08 7, 3 5 3 , 69 2 1.17 7,9 37, 59 1 1.19 8 ,107, 4 67
2040 724,028 7, 519, 3 9 3 1.06 7,9 96 , 076 1.21 9,074,174 1.35 10,16 8 , 293
2041 774,709 8 , 294 ,102 1.06 8,819,898 1.21 10,009,069 1.35 11, 215 ,914
2042 828,939 9,123, 0 41 1.06 9,701, 386 1.21 11,009,408 1.35 12,336,868
2043 886,965 10,010,006 1.06 10,644,579 1.21 12,079,770 1.35 13,536,289
2044 949,052 10,959,059 1.06 11, 6 5 3 ,796 1.21 13, 225,057 1.35 14,819,669
2045 1,015,486 11,9 74 , 5 4 5 1.06 12,733,658 1.21 14,450,515 1.35 16 ,19 2, 8 87
2046 1,086,570 13 , 0 61,115 1.06 13 , 8 8 9,110 1.21 15,761,754 1.35 17, 6 6 2 , 2 2 9
2047 1,162,630 14,223,745 1.06 15,125,443 1.21 17,16 4 ,781 1.35 19, 23 4,426
2048 1, 24 4,014 15 , 4 67, 759 1.06 16,4 48, 320 1.21 18,666,019 1.35 20,916,676
2049 1,331,095 16,798,854 1.06 17, 8 6 3 , 7 9 9 1.21 20,272,344 1.35 22,716,683
Table 19. Physical Impacts to Assets Calculation - Net (NZ$)Table 18. Physical Impacts to Assets Calculation - Gross (NZ$)
49Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
Independent limited assurance report to Mainfreight Limited
Assurance conclusion – Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 GHG emissions
Based on our limited assurance procedures performed and the evidence we have obtained, nothing
has come to our attention that causes us to believe that Mainfreight Limited’s consolidated gross
scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3 Greenhouse Gas (“GHG”) emissions, related additional required
disclosures of gross GHG emissions and gross GHG emissions methods, assumptions and estimation
uncertainty, within the scope of our limited assurance engagement (as outlined below) (together “GHG
disclosures”) included in the Climate Report for the year ended 31 March 2026 (“Climate Statement”)
are not fairly presented and not prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the Aotearoa
New Zealand Climate Standards (“NZ CS”) issued by the External Reporting Board (XRB).
Scope
Ernst & Young Limited (“EY”) has undertaken a limited assurance engagement, to report on
Mainfreight Limited’s (the “Company” or “Mainfreight”):
▪ Consolidated gross GHG emissions:
▪ Scope 1 on page 41;
▪ Scope 2 (location based) on page 41;
▪ Scope 3 on page 41;
▪ Related additional requirements for the disclosure of consolidated GHG emissions on pages 41 to
42 and 46 to 47;
▪ Related GHG emissions methods, assumptions and estimation uncertainty on pages 41 and 46 to
47
included in the Climate Statement for the year ended 31 March 2026 (the “Subject Matter” or “GHG
disclosures”). The reported amounts and disclosures relate to the Company and its subsidiaries as
explained in the Climate Statement.
Our assurance engagement does not extend to any other information included, or referred to, in the
Climate Statement on pages 1 to 45, 47 to 49 and 52 to 55. We have not performed any procedures
with respect to the excluded information and, therefore, no conclusion is expressed on it.
Criteria applied by Mainfreight
In preparing the GHG disclosures, Mainfreight applied NZ CS (the “Criteria”). In applying the Criteria,
the methods and assumptions used are described on pages 46 to 47 of the GHG disclosures, as are
the estimation uncertainties inherent in the methods and assumptions used.
Key matters
In this section we present those matters that, in our professional judgement, were most significant in
undertaking the assurance engagement over GHG Disclosures. These matters were addressed in the
context of our assurance engagement, and in forming our conclusion. We did not reach a separate
assurance conclusion on each individual key matter.

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
Freight GHG emissions
Why significant Procedures to address key matter
Emissions from freight are the most significant
source of GHG emissions, making up 95% of total
Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions.

The estimation of freight‑related emissions requires
the aggregation and processing of large volumes of
transactional data with diverse shipment
characteristics, derived from internal logistics and
freight management systems. The calculation
methodologies applied rely on a combination of
actual and estimated activity data, distance‑based
calculations, allocation methodologies, and
emissions factors sourced from external providers
and industry‑accepted datasets. Mainfreight’s
different transport modes and geographic regions
resulted in variability in data availability, emissions
factor selection and methodological application,
which required significant management judgement
in the measurement of GHG emissions.
In considering Mainfreight’s measurement and
disclosure of freight emissions, we:
▪ Obtained an understanding of the calculation
methods, assumptions, and estimation
uncertainties;
▪ Understood Mainfreight’s GHG methodology for
alignment with the GHG Protocol;
▪ Understood the sources and basis of selected
factors used for different geographies and
activities and checked the consistency of
Mainfreight’s application of those emissions
factors;
▪ Checked a limited sample of freight movements
and agreed the transported weight, distance
travelled and the vehicle type to supporting
evidence.
▪ Understood where estimates had been applied
and performed inquiries to understand the
rationale of these and considered the
appropriateness by confirming consistency with
our understanding of the Mainfreight operations.
▪ Performed analytical procedures to evaluate the
completeness of data based on type of activity
and region/location; and
▪ Considered the disclosures made by Mainfreight
in relation to the calculation methods,
assumptions and uncertainties in estimating
emission sources, as disclosed on page 45 and
46.
Mainfreight’s responsibility
The Directors are responsible, on behalf of the Company, for the preparation and fair presentation of
the GHG disclosures in accordance with NZ CS. This responsibility includes establishing and
maintaining internal controls, maintaining adequate records and making estimates that are relevant to
the preparation of the GHG disclosures, such that they are free from material misstatement, whether
due to fraud or error.
EY’s responsibility
Our responsibility is to express a limited assurance conclusion on the GHG disclosures based on the
procedures we have performed and the evidence we have obtained.
Our engagement was conducted in accordance with New Zealand Standard on Assurance
Engagements 1 Assurance Engagements over Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures (“NZ SAE 1”)
and in accordance with the International Standard for Assurance Engagements (New Zealand):
Assurance Engagements on Greenhouse Gas Statements (“ISAE (NZ) 3410”). Those standards require
that we plan and perform this engagement to obtain limited assurance about whether the GHG
disclosures have been prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the Criteria. The nature,
timing and extent of the procedures selected depend on our judgment, including an assessment of the
risk of material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
50Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
We believe that the evidence obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our limited
assurance conclusion.
As we are engaged to form an independent conclusion on the GHG Disclosures prepared by
management, we are not permitted to be involved in the preparation of the GHG information as doing
so may compromise our independence.
Ernst & Young provides financial statement audit, taxation compliance services, taxation advisory
services, financial statement preparation services and other assurance related services to
Mainfreight. Partners and employees of our firm may deal with Mainfreight on normal terms within the
ordinary course of trading activities of the business of Mainfreight. We have no other relationship
with, or interest in, the Mainfreight.
Our independence and quality management
We have complied with the independence and other ethical requirements of NZ SAE 1 Assurance
Engagements over Greenhouse Gas Emissions Disclosures issued by the External Reporting Board
(XRB) and the Professional and Ethical Standard 1 International Code of Ethics for Assurance
Practitioners (including International Independence Standards) (New Zealand) issued by the New
Zealand Auditing and Assurance Standards Board, which are founded on fundamental principles of
integrity, objectivity, professional competence and due care, confidentiality and professional
behaviour.
The firm applies Professional and Ethical Standard 3 Quality Management for Firms that Perform
Audits or Reviews of Financial Statements, or Other Assurance or Related Services Engagements,
which requires the firm to design, implement and operate a system of quality management including
policies or procedures regarding compliance with ethical requirements, professional standards and
applicable legal and regulatory requirements.
Description of procedures performed
Procedures performed in a limited assurance engagement vary in nature and timing from, and are less
in extent than, for a reasonable assurance engagement. Consequently, the level of assurance obtained
in a limited assurance engagement is substantially lower than the assurance that would have been
obtained had a reasonable assurance engagement been performed. Our procedures were designed to
obtain a limited level of assurance on which to base our conclusion and do not provide all the evidence
that would be required to provide a reasonable level of assurance.
Our procedures did not include testing controls or performing procedures relating to checking
aggregation or calculation of data within IT systems.
A limited assurance engagement consists of making enquiries, primarily of persons responsible for
preparing the report and related information and applying analytical and other relevant procedures.
Our procedures included:
▪ Obtaining, through inquiries, an understanding of Mainfreight’s control environment, processes
and information systems relevant to the preparation of the GHG Disclosures. We did not evaluate
the design of particular control activities, or obtain evidence about their implementation;
▪ Evaluating whether Mainfreight’s methods for developing estimates are appropriate and had been
consistently applied. Our procedures did not include testing the data on which the estimates are

A member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited
based or separately developing our own estimates against which to evaluate Mainfreight’s
estimates;
▪ Considering the appropriateness of emissions factors applied by Mainfreight in measuring the
GHG emissions;
▪ Testing a limited number of items to, or from, supporting records, as appropriate;
▪ Performing analytical procedures on particular emission categories by comparing the expected
GHGs emitted to reported GHGs emitted and made inquiries of management to obtain
explanations for any significant differences we identified; and
▪ Considering the presentation and disclosure of the GHG disclosures.
We also performed such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.
Although we considered the effectiveness of management’s internal controls when determining the
nature and extent of our procedures, our assurance engagement was not designed to provide
assurance on internal controls.
Inherent uncertainties
The GHG quantification process is subject to scientific uncertainty, which arises because of incomplete
scientific knowledge about the measurement of GHGs. Additionally, GHG procedures are subject to
estimation uncertainty resulting from the measurement and calculation processes used to quantify
emissions within the bounds of existing scientific knowledge.
Other matters
The comparative GHG disclosures (that is GHG disclosures for the period ended 31 March 2024 and
31 March 2025 have been subject to reasonable and limited assurance by another assurance
provider, with their unmodified assurance report dated on 16 May 2024 and 30 June 2025.
Use of our assurance report
We disclaim any assumption of responsibility for any reliance on this assurance report to any persons
other than Mainfreight, or for any purpose other than that for which it was prepared.
Our review included web-based information that was available via web links as of the date of this
statement. We provide no assurance over changes to the content of this web-based information after
the date of this assurance statement.
The engagement partner on the engagement resulting in this independent assurance conclusion is
Matthew Cowie.





Ernst & Young Limited
Auckland
30 June 2026

51Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

NZ CS1 Content Index
Sub-headingClauseDisclosurePage
Governance: To enable primary users to understand both the role an entity’s governance body plays in overseeing climate-related risks and
climate-related opportunities, and the role management plays in assessing and managing those climate-related risks and opportunities.
Disclosures
7athe identity of the governance body responsible for oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities;23
7ba description of the governance body’s oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities (see paragraph 8);23
7ca description of management’s role in assessing and managing climate-related risks and opportunities (see paragraph 9).24
Governance Body
Oversight
8athe processes and frequency by which the governance body is informed about climate-related risks and opportunities;24
8bhow the governance body ensures that the appropriate skills and competencies are available to provide oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities;23
8chow the governance body considers climate-related risks and opportunities when developing and overseeing implementation of the entity’s strategy; 23
8d
how the governance body sets, monitors progress against, and oversees achievement of metrics and targets for managing climate-related risks and opportunities, including whether and if so how, related
performance metrics are incorporated into remuneration policies (see also paragraph 22(h))
23
Management's
Role
9a
how climate-related responsibilities are assigned to management-level positions or committees, and the process and frequency by which management-level positions or committees engage with the governance
body;
24
9bthe related organisational structure(s) showing where these management-level positions and committees lie; 24
9cthe processes and frequency by which management is informed about, makes decisions on, and monitors, climate-related risks and opportunities.24
Strategy: To enable primary users to understand how climate change is currently impacting an entity and how it may do so in the future. This includes the scenario
analysis an entity has undertaken, the climate-related risks and opportunities an entity has identified, the anticipated impacts and financial impacts of these, and
how an entity will position itself as the global and domestic economy transitions towards a low-emissions, climate-resilient future.
Disclosures
11aa description of its current climate-related impacts (see paragraph 12);31
11ba description of the scenario analysis it has undertaken (see paragraph 13);29
11ca description of the climate-related risks and opportunities it has identified over the short, medium, and long term (see paragraph 14);28
11da description of the anticipated impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities (see paragraph 15); 32-37
11ea description of how it will position itself as the global and domestic economy transitions towards a low-emissions, climate-resilient future state (see paragraph 16).39-40
Current impacts
and financial
impacts
12aits current physical and transition impacts;31, 36, 37
12bthe current financial impacts of its physical and transition impacts identified in paragraph 12(a); 31, 36, 37
12cif the entity is unable to disclose quantitative information for paragraph 12(b), an explanation of why that is the case.N/A
Scenario Analysis
undertaken
13
An entity must describe the scenario analysis it has undertaken to help identify its climate-related risks and opportunities and better understand the resilience of its business model and strategy. This must
include a description of how an entity has analysed, at a minimum, a 1.5 degrees Celsius climate-related scenario, a 3 degrees Celsius or greater climate-related scenario, and a third climate-related scenario (see
paragraph 11(b))
29-31
Climate-related
risks and
opportunities
14ahow it defines short, medium and long term and how the definitions are linked to its strategic planning horizons and capital deployment plans;44
14bwhether the climate-related risks and opportunities identified are physical or transition risks or opportunities, including, where relevant, their sector and geography; 32-37
14chow climate-related risks and opportunities serve as an input to its internal capital deployment and funding decision-making processes.44
Anticipated
impacts and
financial impacts
15athe anticipated impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities reasonably expected by the entity;32-37
15bthe anticipated financial impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities reasonably expected by an entity;32-37
15ca description of the time horizons over which the anticipated financial impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities could reasonably be expected to occur; 32-37
15dif an entity is unable to disclose quantitative information for paragraph 15(b), an explanation of why that is the case.N/A
Transition plan
aspects of its
strategy
16aa description of its current business model and strategy27
16bthe transition plan aspects of its strategy, including how its business model and strategy might change to address its climate-related risks and opportunities39-40
16cthe extent to which transition plan aspects of its strategy are aligned with its internal capital deployment and funding decision-making processes39-40, 44
Risk Management: To enable primary users to understand how an entity’s climate-related risks are identified, assessed, and managed
and how those processes are integrated into existing risk management processes.
Disclosures
18aa description of its processes for identifying, assessing and managing climate-related risks (see paragraph 19);25-26
18ba description of how its processes for identifying, assessing, and managing climate-related risks are integrated into its overall risk management processes.25
19athe tools and methods used to identify, and to assess the scope, size, and impact of, its identified climate-related risks25
19bthe short-term, medium-term, and long term time horizons considered, including specifying the duration of each of these time horizons26
19cwhether any parts of the value chain are excluded25
19dthe frequency of assessment25
19eits processes for prioritising climate-related risks relative to other types of risks23
52Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

Sub-headingClauseDisclosurePage
Metrics and Targets: To enable primary users to understand how an entity measures and manages its climate-related risks and opportunities.
Metrics and targets also provide a basis upon which primary users can compare entities within a sector or industry.
Disclosures
21athe metrics that are relevant to all entities regardless of industry and business model (see paragraph 22)41- 43
21bindustry-based metrics relevant to its industry or business model used to measure and manage climate-related risks and opportunities41
21cany other key performance indicators used to measure and manage climate-related risks and opportunities45
21dthe targets used to manage climate-related risks and opportunities, and performance against those targets (see paragraph 23)45
Metric
Categories
22agreenhouse gas (GHG) emissions: gross emissions in metric tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) classified as (see paragraph 24):41
22a(i) scope 1; (ii) scope 2 (calculated using the location-based method); (iii) scope 3;41
22bGHG emissions intensity;42
22ctransition risks: amount or percentage of assets or business activities vulnerable to transition risks;36-37
22dphysical risks: amount or percentage of assets or business activities vulnerable to physical risks;33
22eclimate-related opportunities: amount or percentage of assets, or business activities aligned with climate-related opportunities;37, 4 4
22fcapital deployment: amount of capital expenditure, financing, or investment deployed toward climate-related risks and opportunities;44
22ginternal emissions price: price per metric tonne of CO2e used internally by an entity;41
22h
remuneration: management remuneration linked to climate-related risks and opportunities in the current period, expressed as a percentage, weighting, description or amount of overall management
remuneration (see also paragraph 8(d))
41
Target s
23athe time frame over which the target applies;44-45
23bany associated interim targets;45
23cthe base year from which progress is measured;44
23da description of performance against the targets;45
23efor each GHG emissions target:44-45
(i) whether the target is an absolute target or intensity target; (ii) the entity’s view as to how the target contributes to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius;(iii) the entity’s basis for the view
expressed in 23(e)(ii), including any reliance on the opinion or methods provided by third parties; and (iv) the extent to which the target relies on offsets, whether the offsets are verified or certified, and if
so, under which scheme or schemes.
GHG Emissions
24aa statement describing the standard or standards that its GHG emissions have been measured in accordance with;41
24bthe GHG emissions consolidation approach used: equity share, financial control, or operational control;41
24cthe source of emission factors and the global warming potential (GWP) rates used or a reference to the GWP source;48
24da summary of specific exclusions of sources, including facilities, operations or assets with a justification for their exclusion.42
Assurance of GHG Emissions
Disclosures
25
Part 7A of the Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013 requires that the disclosure of an entity’s GHG emissions as required by Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards are the subject of an assurance
engagement. This Standard requires that this assurance engagement is a limited assurance engagement at a minimum.
50 - 51
26For the avoidance of doubt, the following information required by Aotearoa New Zealand Climate Standards is subject to an assurance engagement:41- 42
26aGHG emissions: gross emissions in metric tonnes of CO2e classified as (see paragraph 22(a)):41- 42
(i) scope 1; (ii) scope 2 (calculated using the location-based method); (iii) scope 3;
26badditional requirements for the disclosure of GHG emissions (see paragraph 24);
41- 42,
46- 47
26cGHG emissions methods, assumptions and estimation uncertainty (see NZ CS 3 General Requirements for Climate-related Disclosures paragraphs 52 to 54).46- 47
TCFD Content Index
Core elementsRecommendationsPage
GovernanceaDescribe the board's oversight of climate-related risks23
Governanceb
Describe management's role in assessing and managing climate-related risks and
opportunities
24
Risk Managementa
Describe the organisation’s processes for identifying and assessing
climate-related risks
25-26
Risk ManagementbDescribe the organisation's process for managing climate-related risks26
Risk Managementc
Describe how processes for identifying, assessing and managing climate-related risks
are integrated into the organisation's overall risk management
28
Strategya
Describe the climate-related risks and opportunities the organisation has identified
over the short, medium and long term
28
Core elementsRecommendationsPage
Strategyb
Describe the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on the organisation's
business, strategy and financial planning
27-31
Strategyc
Describe the resilience of the organisation's strategy, taking into consideration
different climate-related scenarios, including a 2°C or lower scenario
32-37
Metrics and Targetsa
Disclose the metrics used by the organisation to assess climate-related risks and
opportunities in line with its strategy and risk management process
32-37
Metrics and Targetsb
Disclose Scope 1, Scope 2, and, if appropriate, Scope 3 greenhouse gas (GHG)
emissions, and the related risks
41
Metrics and Targetsc
Describe the targets used by the organisation to manage climate-related risks and
opportunities and performance against targets
44-45
53Climate-related Disclosure ReportIntroduction Governance Risk Management Strategy Metrics & Targets Additional Information

GRI Index
DisclosureNamePage Number(s)Explanation/Other References*
GRI2: General Disclosures 2021
2-1Organisational detailsAR: 70, 82, 105
2-2Entities included in the organization’s sustainability reportingSR: 41
2-3 Reporting period, frequency and contact pointAR: 105, SR: 23Annual
2-4Restatements of informationNot Applicable
2-5External assuranceSR: 50
2-6Activities, value chain and other business relationships
Six largest customer verticals that are a focus for our network – Food & Beverage, DIY, FMCG, Chemicals, Technology
& Electronics, and Medical & Healthcare
2-9Governance structure and compositionAR: 56-62
2-10Nomination and selection of the highest governance bodyConstitution of Mainfreight Limited
2-11Chair of the highest governance bodyAR: 56
2-12Role of the highest governance body in overseeing the management of impactsAR: 56-62Board Charter
2-13Delegation of responsibility for managing impactsSR: 24
2-15Conflicts of interestBoard Charter, Code of Ethics
2-17Collective knowledge of the highest governance bodySR: 23
2-18Evaluation of the performance of the highest governance bodySR: 24
2-19Remuneration policiesAR: 98, SR: 23
2-20Process to determine remunerationA R : 61- 6 2Remuneration Committee Charter, Remuneration Policy
2-22Statement on sustainable development strategySR: 3
2-26Mechanisms for seeking advice and raising concernsCode of Ethics, Whistle-Blower Policy
2-28Membership associationsSR: 6
GRI 201: Economic Performance 2016
201-1Direct economic value generated and distributedAR: 65-69
201-2Financial implications and other risks and opportunities due to climate changeSR: 28, 32-37
GRI 203: Indirect Economic Impacts 2016
203 -1Infrastructure investments and services supportedAR: 26, 50-51
GRI 205: Anti-corruption 2016
205-2Communication and training about anti-corruption policies and proceduresA R : 61Guidelines for Anti-Corruption Practices
GRI 305: Emissions 2016
305 -1 Direct (Scope 1) GHG emissionsSR: 41
305-2Energy indirect (Scope 2) GHG emissionsSR: 41
305-3Other indirect (Scope 3) GHG emissionsSR: 41
GRI 404: Training and Education 2016
404-2 Programmes for upgrading employee skills and transition assistance programmesAR: 24,28
404-3Percentage of employees receiving regular performance and career development reviews99% - reviews conducted as part of our discretionary profit bonus (captured in internal branch audits)
GRI 405: Diversity and Equal Opportunities 2016
4 05 -1Diversity of governance bodies and employeesAR: 15, 52-54, 56 
GRI 3: Material Topics 2021
3-3Management of material topicsSR: 4-21
* Documents shown in green are available in the Corporate Governance section of the Company’s website:
www.mainfreight.com/global/en-nz/investor/corporate-governance
Mainfreight has reported the information cited in this GRI Content Index for the period 01/04/2025-31/03/2026 with reference to the GRI Standards, GRI 1: Foundation 2021
Key: AR - 2026 Annual Report
SR - 2026 Sustainability and Climate Report
54GRI Index