Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The text compares 'Say on Climate' initiatives—where companies submit their own strategies for shareholder votes—with shareholder-led climate resolutions. It argues that for companies like Total SE, 'Say on Climate' can act as a 'distraction' or 'diversion' that allows management to legitimize 'watered down' or 'incrementalist' strategies. The author contends that only shareholder-led resolutions allow investors to 'define the terms of debate' and push for strategies compatible with viable climate trajectories, citing the 2020 resolution at Total SE as a positive example.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The author argues that the 'Say on Climate' initiative, which asks companies to submit their climate strategy for an annual shareholder vote, can be a 'distraction' or 'diversion' for companies like Total SE that already communicate extensively on climate issues.
  • There is a risk that 'Say on Climate' allows companies to gain legitimacy for 'watered down' or 'incrementalist' strategies because the majority of shareholders typically vote in agreement with management.
  • The document notes that some companies are weakening the original 'Say on Climate' proposal by extending the voting timeline; for example, Shell committed to a vote every three years rather than every year, potentially blocking other requests until 2024.
  • Unlike shareholder-led resolutions, the results of 'Say on Climate' votes are not binding, meaning a company could choose to ignore the outcome regardless of whether the strategy was approved or rejected.
  • The author asserts that shareholder-led resolutions are the only way for investors to 'define the terms of debate' and push companies toward a climate strategy compatible with a viable trajectory.

Cite the original document

APA
admin (2021). Say on Climate vs Climate Resolution. Reclaim Finance. https://reclaimfinance.org/site/en/2021/02/22/say-on-climate-vs-climate-resolution/
Chicago
admin. Say on Climate vs Climate Resolution. Reclaim Finance, 2021. https://reclaimfinance.org/site/en/2021/02/22/say-on-climate-vs-climate-resolution/.
Wikipedia
{{cite press release |last1=admin |title=Say on Climate vs Climate Resolution |publisher=Reclaim Finance |date=22 February 2021 |url=https://reclaimfinance.org/site/en/2021/02/22/say-on-climate-vs-climate-resolution/ |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@misc{admin2021say, author = {admin}, title = {{Say on Climate vs Climate Resolution}}, publisher = {Reclaim Finance}, year = {2021}, month = feb, url = {https://reclaimfinance.org/site/en/2021/02/22/say-on-climate-vs-climate-resolution/}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated