Voting analysis

This report examines how the UK’s ten largest asset managers voted on climate resolutions at major oil and gas companies in 2022. It reveals their use of shareholder power to push for climate action, offering key findings and recommendations as the 2023 AGM season approaches.

Resolutions 2024

A record 27 investors co-filed a Shell climate resolution for Paris-aligned targets.

Previous resolutions

Since 2016, Follow This has filed climate resolutions at oil majors.

Voting analysis

Analysis of top 10 UK asset managers' votes on Big Oil climate resolutions.

Resolutions results

The success of our resolutions shows: shareholder activism works.

Summary of key findings

In 2022, the ten largest UK asset managers largely supported Paris-aligned emission targets at major oil companies, particularly in the US. While their backing for “Follow This” climate resolutions grew from 2017-2022, a split emerged among the top four regarding Shell and BP.

Top 10 UK asset manager votes

In 2022, the ten largest UK asset managers express overwhelming support for Paris aligned emission reduction targets at Oil Majors
Consistent votes in favor of the Follow This resolutions at US companies; modest support for Paris aligned emission reduction targets at Shell and BP
Top 10 UK asset managers support for the Follow This climate resolutions continued to increase support over the course of 2017-2022
There exists a dichotomy in top 4 largest UK asset managers in climate voting at Shell and BP
Say on Climate resolutions at BP and Shell lead to confusing voting outcomes and allow companies to claim overwhelming shareholder support for insufficient strategies

Top 10 UK asset manager rationales

The voting rationales of the UK’s ten largest asset managers reflect that none of the asset managers believe Shell and BP’s strategies are Paris aligned despite the companies’ claims that they are.
Investors focused on engagement reward incremental progress by ‘industry leading’ companies.
UK asset managers do not find Scope 3 conceptually problematic nor a request for Scope 3 emission reductions at oil and gas too prescriptive.
Shell and BP misuse the concept of in-house Say on Climate resolutions to get rubberstamp approval from shareholders for insufficient climate strategies.

Recommendations

Shareholders need to use the full extent of their rights to incentivize oil and gas companies to act in the long-term best interest of their shareholders and the global economy. In order for investors to better drive change on a company level, it is recommended that asset managers:

Explicitly commit to voting for non-prescriptive shareholder resolutions that request emission reduction targets in line with Paris
Align stewardship policies to reflect voting for shareholder resolutions not as an escalation but as a necessary addition to engagement to hold corporations accountable
Vote against management Say on Climate resolutions when the company is not in line with Paris.
Improve transparency on proxy voting by publishing voting policies, voting records, and voting rationales in a manner that is timely and user-friendly.
Timely pre-declaration of voting intentions for non-prescriptive climate resolutions at Big Oil
For CA100+ company leads; flag resolutions through the CA100+ process by timely pre-declaration of your vote
Escalate at Oil and Gas companies failing to make progress using tools focused on decarbonizing your portfolio and the world economy such as co-filing resolutions, voting against directors, auditors, shareholder litigation.
Assess company emission reduction targets on their quality, not their relative performance.