Numbers show that support for shareholders ’proposals aimed at addressing environmental and social risks.
A report collected by the responsible investment campaign group, among 279 decisions for environmental, social and governance shareholders (ESG) in the annual public meetings last year in the United Kingdom, Europe and the United States, found four – or only 1.4 % – only the support of the guaranteed majority.
It represents a sharp decrease since recent years, after it decreased from 21 % in 2021 to 14 % in 2022, and 3 % in 2023. However, it also reflects a severe decrease in supporting ESG issues in the United States, where right -wing activists and political activists have targeted financial companies to support climate and diversity policies.
The Donald Trump’s policy makers encourage the retreat from environmental policies, in favor of supporting oil and gas production. The shift has paid Six of the largest banks in the United States -Citigroup, Bank of America, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo and Goldman Sachs-to withdraw from the net net banking alliance sponsored by the United Nations in recent weeks.
Use Trump as well Executive orders To reflect diversity, stock and integration policies (Dei) in the federal government and try to apply them to the private sector. Companies including Google, Alphabet, Facebook, Meta, as well as financial companies Deloitwitt and Joldman SachsI started to back down from their DEI policies in response.
The decisions of shareholders are usually put forward by activists and activists who are trying to compel corporate managers to address issues including their climate impact, potential human rights violations, diversity and inclusion policies, and executive payment. While these decisions are not legally binding, they can press the plate to take action.
The Sharection vote report on the increasing gap between the asset managers on both sides of the Atlantic, with those in the United Kingdom and Europe support 81 % of ESG proposals for shareholders on average last year, compared to our American peers, who supported only 25 % of the proposals a year .
It also highlighted the lack of support by the four largest asset managers in the world: Blackrock, Fidelity Investments, State Street Global Advisors and Vanguard. Companies, based in the United States, and a collection of 23 trillion (18 Trin) assets, have only supported 7 % of shareholders ’decisions in 2024.
“This is the worst result we have seen from the asset managers in the six years in which we monitor their voting performance and show a disturbing retreat of ambition when an urgent need is it,” said Claudia Gray, head of the financial sector research at Charic.
“We live in a world in which asset managers have a great impact on the companies they invest in. Many claim that they play their role in addressing important issues such as climate change, yet our report calls for questioning whether the majority of the world’s wealth is effectively managed by companies Investment.
The campaign group claimed that asset managers have threw their weight behind shareholders ’decisions, and they could help improve conditions for low -wage workers who struggle with the global cost crisis and paid climate currencies at a time when the impact of the climate is the crisis crisis devastating societies around the world.
After promoting the newsletter
Only two of the 73 shareholders ’decisions that focused on climate change received sufficient support for shareholders to pass last year.
“While climate collapse is already destroying life all over the world – from prolonged drought to deadly forest fires – the financing sector must lead urgent environmental work, not its slowdown,” said Gray. “What is clear is that we need to organize better than policymakers, leadership and daring ambition of decision makers in the financial sector.”
Commenting on the Sharection report, a Vanguard spokesman said: “The money organized from Vanguard votes with a constant focus on long -term interests for fund investors, according to the published agent voting policies.”
A spokesman for Blackrock said that the voting decisions “are based on the long -term financial interests of our customers. Over the age of 2024, we found that most of the proposals of environmental and social shareholders were exaggerated, lacking economic merit, or unlikely to enhance the value of shareholders in the long run. . ”He pointed out that customers have the ability to make the voices of themselves, including for shareholders’ decisions.
Fidelity Investments and State Street were contacted to comment.
