Each spring, major corporations hold their annual shareholder meetings, which present key opportunities for investors to vote for or against board members, and to vote on shareholder resolutions on climate, greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity, deforestation, Indigenous rights, political spending and lobbying, and more.
The Sierra Club compiles a list of key votes to watch at these annual meetings, focused on shareholder resolutions that address the risks associated with climate change and biodiversity loss, as well as votes against boards of directors at companies misaligned with investor expectations on climate change and biodiversity. The Sierra Club’s full list of flagged votes can be found here, and are outlined below.
This year’s big trends to watch
- Despite the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) stepping back from robust engagement on no-action requests, a significant number of climate- and sustainability-related shareholder proposals are proceeding to a vote.
- Continued calls for accountability from corporate boards of directors at high-impact companies that fail to meet key metrics on climate and biodiversity.
- A wide range of climate-related disclosure resolutions — including emissions reporting, portfolio risk disclosures, litigation risk assessments, and scrutiny of upstream capital expenditures – encourages investors to weigh in on the multitude of ways companies can better manage climate-related risks.
- An increase in action-oriented proposals from last year, calling on tangible policy changes from companies rather than additional disclosures.
Experts with the Sierra Club’s Sustainable Finance campaign are available to comment on these key votes and major trends of the 2026 shareholder meeting season. Please contact sustainablefinance@sierraclub.org to schedule an interview.
Board votes
Board directors play a critical role in determining a company’s direction, including how it manages and mitigates climate risks. Director votes happen annually, allowing investors to weigh in on critical issues, even if shareholder proposals haven’t been filed. Over the past few years, investors have increasingly turned to board votes as an important corporate governance tool. As climate risks grow and threaten business operations, directors should steer companies toward action, especially in sectors with large carbon footprints. Where they don’t, votes against these directors are warranted.
See the Sierra Club’s full list of flagged votes list for more information on the relevant board members.
Vote AGAINST the entire board at high-emitting and high-impact companies failing on critical climate metrics
For high-emitting and high-impact companies, votes against the board are warranted if the if the company lacks a transition plan aligned with 1.5C pathways, relies on offsets to meet interim commitments, has failed to commit to principles of a just transition, and has not adopted a climate lobbying position aligned with the Paris Agreement.
- For companies on the CA100+ list, votes against the Board are warranted at companies receiving failing key metrics in the CA100+ 2025 Benchmark Assessment. This includes: Boeing Company, Canadian Natural Resources, Caterpillar, Chevron, Coal India, EOG Resources, FirstEnergy, Imperial Oil, International Paper Company, JBS, Lockheed Martin Corporation, Martin Marietta Materials, PBF Energy, Petróleos Mexicanos, RTX Corporation (Raytheon), Suzano, Home Depot, and Wesfarmers.
- For US utilities on the CA100+ list, votes against relevant board chairs are warranted if the company is expanding fossil fuel generation to serve data center demand, and is also either delaying coal retirements past 2035 or is relying disproportionately more on coal and gas than renewables. For more information, see the Majority Action 2026 AI Climate Director voting guide. This includes: Duke Energy, FirstEnergy, PPL Corporation, American Electric Power, Southern Company, Dominion Energy, and Exxon Mobil.
- For the largest US banks, votes against the Board are warranted at companies that received low scores on key metrics in the Transition Pathway Initiative’s evaluation of banks. This includes Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan, and Wells Fargo.
- Additionally, votes are recommended against Albert Manifold, board chair of BP, for his refusal to include a shareholder proposal on potential declines in oil and gas demand on the company’s proxy.
Vote AGAINST relevant board leadership at Nature Action 100 companies that have failed to adopt critical metrics for reducing negative impacts on systemic biodiversity risks
For companies that are systematically important for nature/biodiversity (defined as companies on the Nature Action 100 list), votes against either the chair of the board or the lead independent director, AND the chair of the ESG or relevant committee, are warranted if the company lacks a science-based target for nature, lacks supplier engagement policies, and lacks a nature-positive framework.
- Companies where votes against relevant directors are warranted: Alimentation Couche-Tard, Amcor PLC, Asian Paints Ltd, Conagra Brands, Costco Wholesale, LG Chem, Marico, Novartis, Nutrien, Sysco, Target, Sherwin-Williams, TJX Companies, and Zoetis.
Resolution votes
As climate risks intensify, investors require decision-useful information to understand how companies are, or aren’t, preparing for and managing climate-related risks and opportunities. Improving corporate climate disclosures helps provide investors with this much-needed information. However, disclosure alone is not enough. Supporting shareholder resolutions that promote the adoption of policies is important to ensure accountability and drive the implementation of prudent business strategies that meaningfully reduce emissions and other climate-related risks.
See the Sierra Club’s full list of flagged votes list for more information on the relevant shareholder resolutions.
Vote FOR resolutions supporting climate disclosures, target setting, and transition plans
Flagged votes on climate disclosures
- Disclose emissions in operations and/or supply chains: FairFax Financial, NVIDIA, NVR Inc, Verizon
- Disclose plans from fossil fuel capital expenditures: BP
- Disclose plans for subrogation claims for climate-related losses: Chubb Ltd
- Disclose climate-related impacts on insurance capacity: QBE Insurance Group, Travelers Companies
- Disclose climate-related litigation risks: Wells Fargo
- Disclose plans to protect retirement plans from climate risks: Adobe
- Disclose strategy to create shareholder value under declining oil/gas demand: Shell
Flagged votes on target setting and transition plans
- Provide transition plans on data center strategies: Alphabet, Amazon, Meta Platforms
- Adopt greenhouse gas reduction targets: ArcBest, AutoNation, Skyworks Solutions
- Disclose transition plans: Google, Harley-Davidson, NextEra Energy, United Parcel Services
Vote FOR resolutions on biodiversity, deforestation
Biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation threaten economic stability and accelerate climate impacts. To manage systemic financial risks, companies must reduce harm to natural systems that underpin long-term growth. Resolutions calling for stronger biodiversity-related disclosures and protections — especially for critical ecosystems like forests — are essential for mitigating long-term financial risks.
- Disclose biodiversity impact and dependency assessment: Home Depot
- Disclose overall plastic use or value of reducing microplastics pollution: Hyatt Hotels, Lululemon Athletics
- Disclose pesticides use in regenerative agriculture disclosures: Archer-Daniels Midland, Pepsico
- Disclose efforts to curtail pesticides: Target
- Set packaging reduction goals: Lowe’s Companies, Home Depot
Vote FOR resolutions on Indigenous rights and just transition
While environmental factors are often the primary focus of the “E” in an ESG analysis, issues such as Indigenous Peoples’ rights, just transition, and environmental justice are deeply interconnected with companies’ environmental impacts and long-term sustainability. Failures in these areas can create material risks, including delaying or derailing projects, increasing regulatory and legal exposure, and undermining the credibility of corporate climate strategies. Strengthening company policies and disclosures on these topics helps ensure that decarbonization efforts are implemented responsibly.
- Report efficacy of company’s policies on Indigenous Peoples’ rights: Chevron, General Motors
- Improve sustainability disclosures: Coca-Cola Company
- Disclose a third-party environmental justice audit: United Parcel Service
- Publish a human rights impact report: Palantir Technologies
- Disclose plans to avoid shifting data center costs to customers: Southern Company
- Adopt a human rights policy: Dollar General, Gilead Sciences
- Create a board oversight committee on Indigenous Peoples’ rights: Wells Fargo
Vote FOR resolutions on lobbying and political expenditures
Corporate lobbying and political spending play a critical role in shaping the policy environment needed to address systemic climate risks. For investors, transparency in these activities is essential to assess whether companies are supporting or undermining effective climate and sustainability policies. Misalignment between a company’s stated climate commitments and its political engagement can expose investors to regulatory, reputational, and transition risks. Enhanced disclosure and oversight of lobbying and political expenditures help ensure accountability and provide investors with clearer insight into whether corporate influence is advancing a credible, economy-wide transition.
- Report on alignment of lobbying practices with company’s stated policies: JPMorgan Chase, Shake Shack, Volvo
- Disclose direct and indirect lobbying payments: Eli Lilly