Blogs

BlackRock Details Recent Climate Disclosure Vote & Expectations for Board Engagement

By Randi Morrison posted 06-15-2017 02:14 PM

  
In case you missed the write-up in yesterday's Society Alert, further to our proxy season report the week before last: "Climate Change Proposal Passes at ExxonMobil," BlackRock detailed the basis for its recent vote "against" the board's recommendation and "for" the advisory (non-binding) shareholder proposal (Item 12) at ExxonMobil seeking an annual report on the long-term impacts of global climate change policies consistent with the Paris Agreement's 2-degree Celsius warming target.

Aside from the fact that climate risk disclosure is among BlackRock's five engagement priorities for 2017-2018 (which we reported on here), these excerpts from BlackRock's just-published vote bulletin are particularly instructive for other issuers both as respects the investor's perspective on climate change disclosure proposals, as well as its expectations of board/independent director involvement in shareholder engagement:

In the past year, we’ve engaged more directly on Exxon’s reporting of climate-related risks. We have also engaged with the shareholder proponents to better understand their views. We believe it is in long-term shareholders’ best economic interests for Exxon to enhance its disclosures. We therefore voted in favor of the shareholder proposal focused on the 2-degree Celsius warming target (the “2-degree scenario”) as outlined in the Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change.

In addition, we have repeatedly requested to meet with independent board directors over the past two years to better understand the board’s oversight of the company’s long-term strategy and capital allocation priorities amidst major strategic challenges and regulatory inquiry (including but not be limited to oversight of climate risk). The company declined to make directors available, citing a non-engagement policy between independent board members and shareholders.



As a result, we have not been able to fully assess the board’s oversight of a range of key risks and its decision-making process pertaining to long-term strategy and capital allocation. In line with our expectations that the lead independent director should be available to shareholders, we voted against the re-election of the lead independent director and the chair of the committee responsible for setting this policy in both 2016 and 2017. We will continue to request direct engagement with the independent directors.

The bulletin acknowledges favorably that the company published a "2016 Energy & Carbon Summary" report last year following its annual meeting wherein a similar proposal reportedly received 38% shareholder support; however, the fact that the report purportedly didn't address the impact of a 2-degree scenario on the company's performance appears to have quashed any possibility for a favorable vote (i.e., consistent with the board's recommendation) from BlackRock this year.  

Watch this recent episode of Inside America's Boardrooms: "Is Your Board Prepared for the Rise in ESG Activism?", where the Society's Granville Martin discusses with host T.K. Kerstetter the main components of ESG Oversight and what boards can do can do to keep pace, and access numerous additional resources on our ESGShareholder ProposalsInstitutional Investors, and Proxy Season topical pages.

0 comments
353 views

Permalink