Exxon Mobil Corporation | Report on commitment against AMAP work at Exxon Mobil Corporation

AGM date
Previous AGM date
Proposal number
Reason withdrawn
Resolution details
Company ticker
Resolution ask
Report on or disclose
ESG theme
  • Environment
ESG sub-theme
  • Biodiversity / nature
  • Climate change
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Company sector
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved: Shareholders request that the Board of Directors issue a public report, within a reasonable time, assessing the benefits and drawbacks of committing to not engage in oil and gas exploration and production in the AMAP area, particularly in the Arctic Refuge, as well as the financial and reputational risks to the company associated with such development.”
Whereas clause
“Whereas: Petroleum development in ecologically sensitive and biologically rich protected areas poses material financial, climate, and reputational risks.
The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is home to over 200 bird species, 42 species of fish, and 45 species of mammals, including four threatened species protected under the Endangered Species Act. It is also experiencing rapid warming, estimated to be nearly four times faster than the rest of the world.

Supporting statement
Pursuit of drilling and related activities in the Arctic Refuge and broader AMAP area could expose ExxonMobil to considerable material financial risk, including:
• Regulatory: The political landscape creates uncertainty for developing the Refuge; any developments could become stranded assets. The Interior Department has suspended current oil and gas leases in the Refuge, and the House of Representatives has passed legislation including provisions for the repeal of the Arctic Refuge Oil and Gas Leasing Program
• Liability: In its 2020 10-K, Exxon states that ‘substantial liabilities and other adverse impacts could result if we do not timely [sic] identify and mitigate applicable risks, or if our management systems and controls do not function as intended.’ The Trans-Alaska Pipeline will transport oil from the Arctic Refuge. Oil spills have occurred along the pipeline and around Prudhoe Bay, the pipeline’s northern terminus, including a three-week-long spill in 2020.
• Price Risk: Oil spills negatively affect stock prices. Chevron’s share price declined 8.5% in the weeks after a public announcement of an 800,000 gallon spill at a Chevron oil well. BP’s stock dropped 54% as a result of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
• Constrained access to capital: All major US banks are now unwilling to finance drilling in the Arctic Refuge, including Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, CitiBank, and Bank of America.
• Reputational: Reputationally damaging events have financial consequences. BP lost 38% of its American clients after the 2010 oil spill. 67% of Americans oppose drilling in the Arctic Refuge. In 2020, 259 organizations, representing more than 27 million members, launched a campaign against drilling in the Arctic Refuge.

While ExxonMobil pulled out of some joint ventures in the Arctic in 2018 and terminated their leases in the Arctic Refuge, competitors Chevron and Hilcorp have no remaining stake in the Refuge and stopped pursuing any exploration projects in the region in 2021.

Drilling in the Arctic, and particularly in the Arctic Refuge, poses unnecessary risks to the company and fragile Arctic ecosystems as climate-related risks grow in concern for investors.

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.