CHEVRON CORPORATION | Rescind the 2021 "reduce scope 3 emissions" stockholder proposal at CHEVRON CORPORATION

1.26% votes in favour
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
Resolution details
Company ticker
Lead filer
Resolution ask
Other ask
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • GHG targets / emissions
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Company sector
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved: Shareholders rescind the 2021 proposal and thereby reject the policy embedded in it that insists the Company substantially reduce consumer use of its products.
Supporting statement
Steven Milloy has submitted the following proposal for consideration at the Annual Meeting.

Supporting statement: At its 2021 shareholder meeting, the Company adopted a misguided activist resolution insisting on decarbonization according to a politicized schedule through reductions in Scope 3 emissions.

But by definition, “Scope 3 emissions are the result of activities from assets not owned or controlled by the reporting organization….” In fact, Scope 3 emissions are the emissions of Chevron’s consumers.

This means that the 2021 shareholder resolution seeks to force Chevron to sell less of the products it produces and from which it profits.

The 2021 shareholder proposal was submitted by an activist group, Follow This. That proposal wasn’t motivated by interest in Chevron’s legally established business purposes, but solely by anti-fossil fuel activism that uncritically accepts the illegal Paris

Climate Agreement, and works to force it on corporations without consideration of legal, financial, technological, geopolitical and other relevant factors. Follow This’s motivation is unambiguous. On its website, the group states “we have the power to change oil companies from within – as shareholders. Follow This unites responsible shareholders to push Big Oil to go green. Business as usual is over.”

Chevron’s legal purpose, in contrast, is to sell petroleum products and to make operating decisions that maximize an objectively determined and financially measurable return on shareholders’ investment.

The question of whether emission reduction by corporations can have any effect on the world’s climate is highly controversial. Certainly no one company can do anything that will make the slightest difference to global climate, regardless of your view of climate science.

While climate activists insist that “climate risk is investment risk,” they fail to recognize that all other risks -- including technological risks, model-error risks, and geopolitical-stability risks -- are also financial risks.

Because the 2021 shareholder proposal to “reduce scope 3 emissions” can only harm Chevron and its shareholders while accomplishing nothing for global climate, it must be rescinded.

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation name Declared voting intentions Rationale
EFG Asset Management Against A vote AGAINST this resolution is warranted as it is contrary to principles of corporate governance that
encourage companies to be responsive to shareholder proposals that are supported by a large percentage of
the company's shareholders who voted at the annual meeting. Moreover, the request runs contrary to
guidance provided by internationally recognized organizations and frameworks, such as Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change.
Rothschild & co Asset Management Against

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.