Shareholders hold the key to solving the climate crisis. Our climate resolutions empower them to vote for change at Big Oil.
A record 27 investors co-filed a Shell climate resolution for Paris-aligned targets.
Since 2016, Follow This has filed climate resolutions at oil majors.
Analysis of top 10 UK asset managers' votes on Big Oil climate resolutions.
The success of our resolutions shows: shareholder activism works.
Investors have a unique chance to shape how companies operate, especially on big issues like climate change. One powerful way they do this is through shareholder resolutions. These are formal requests allowing those who own a piece of a company to influence its direction.
For our planet, these requests are becoming a key tool. They help push companies to act more responsibly toward the environment and quicken the move away from fossil fuels to clean energy.
A shareholder resolution is a proposal brought forward by investors for a vote at a company’s yearly general meeting. These proposals aim to get specific topics on the company’s official agenda. They make companies talk about important matters publicly, and they make investors vote on them. In the past, these resolutions covered many different subjects. Now, more and more of them are about climate change.
Many climate-focused shareholder resolutions ask companies to set goals that match the Paris Climate Agreement. This agreement aims to keep global warming well below 2°C, ideally at 1.5°C, compared to levels before the industrial age. To meet this, companies must greatly cut their greenhouse gas emissions, especially Scope 3 emissions. These are the emissions that come from customers using a company’s products. For an oil company, these make up a large part of its total emissions, usually between 80% and 95%.
Some resolutions, called “Say on Climate,” ask investors to simply approve a company’s current climate plan, even if it is not strong enough. But resolutions from groups that push for change directly ask for targets that align with the Paris Agreement and for clearer accountability. The words in these resolutions are chosen with care. They aim to be helpful but also clear. They avoid telling companies exactly what to do but firmly ask for goals for their operations and products that meet the Paris Agreement.
Shareholder resolutions are a strong way to make big companies act on climate change for several reasons:
As owners, investors can influence how companies behave, even when governments face limits. Voting at annual meetings is the main way they do this. Even a small number of votes against the current management can show major unhappiness among investors and make companies change. Historically, even a little support, like 6.3% at Shell in 2017, was enough to start action.
Shareholder resolutions have successfully made large oil companies adopt goals for cutting emissions, including Scope 3 emissions. For example:
Investors, especially large institutions, have a duty to protect the money given to them. They know that long-term earnings are at risk in a world economy made unstable by severe climate change. This includes risks like assets that lose value, government actions, and costly lawsuits. So, supporting climate resolutions is seen not just as doing the right thing, but as a financially smart choice.
Resolutions give investors a combined voice, especially when large investment groups join in. In 2024, 27 institutional investors managing €4 trillion worked together to file a resolution at Shell. This shows growing unhappiness with Shell’s climate approach. This organized effort signals a demand for alignment with environmental needs and investor interests.
Even firms that advise on proxy voting, like ISS and Glass Lewis, often suggest voting against activist resolutions. However, they have advised in favor of Follow This resolutions a few times, especially for their advice on sustainability. This shows a growing recognition of how good these resolutions are.
The success of climate resolutions in making major oil companies adopt goals, despite their first resistance, marks a big change in how investors view climate action. This change shows that “investors understand that no investment is safe in a global economy wracked by devastating climate change.”
