ISS Aims to Apply Additional Climate Change Voting Guidelines

Nov 8, 2021

Reading Time : 5 min

Climate

Adding to ISS’s U.S. Proxy Voting Guidelines policy recommendations related to climate change/greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, energy efficiency and renewable energy, proposed changes for 2022 include a focus on the world’s highest GHG emitting companies and add policy provisions for “say on climate” votes.

Board Accountability

For the highest emitting companies, ISS is proposing to introduce recommendations to vote against the re-election of, or recommend withholding votes for, relevant directors or any other appropriate items at companies that have not made appropriate climate-related disclosures, such as according to the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) framework, or that have not set quantitative GHG reduction targets.

“Say on Climate” Voting

ISS is also proposing new policies codifying the case-by-case analysis frameworks for (i) management proposals seeking approval of climate transition plans and progress, and (ii) shareholder proposals requesting climate-related reporting and regular shareholder votes on companies’ climate transition plans and progress.

These proposed policies are reproduced in full below.


Changes at the SEC

ISS’s request for comment comes a day after the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Division of Corporation Finance (the “Division”) issued a new Staff Legal Bulletin regarding shareholder proposals. The new Staff Legal Bulletin explains the Division’s views on Rule 14a-8(i)(7), the ordinary business exception, and Rule 14a-8(i)(5), the economic relevance exception. As discussed here, the new Staff Legal Bulletin will ultimately make it more challenging for companies to exclude shareholder proposals under the two exceptions, particularly when related to climate or social issues. As shareholder proposals on climate issues are becoming more prominent, the combined impact of the Staff Legal Bulletin and ISS’s proposed policy changes may make it particularly daunting for companies trying to avoid inclusion of such shareholder proposals in their proxy statements. Nevertheless, companies can take a proactive approach to avoiding future climate-related shareholder proposals. For instance, companies can:

  • Engage in dialogue with shareholders on climate-related topics in advance of proxy season.
  • Take action to address or mitigate the stated concerns of shareholders.
  • Continue to track developments and anticipate possible proposals and the company’s response.

Diversity

Current ISS policy states that for companies in the Russel 3000 or S&P 1500 indices, companies without women on the company’s board will generally receive a vote against or withhold for the chair of the nominating committee. After a one-year grace period, for meetings on or after February 1, 2023, ISS has proposed to expand this policy to companies not in the Russell 3000 and S&P 1500 indices. This follows the ISS policy announced last year for U.S. companies in the Russell 3000 and S&P 1500 indices to have at least one racially/ethnically diverse director that will go into effect in 2022 after the one-year grace period in 2021.

Unequal Voting Rights

Beginning February 1, 2023, ISS intends to recommend against the responsible director(s) at all U.S. companies with unequal voting rights. Previously, ISS policy was solely focused on newly public companies that adopted unequal voting rights without a sunset mechanism.

Board and Other Governance Structure Elections

ISS is proposing to update the Brazilian Benchmark policy to reflect an expectation of timely disclosure as well as to extend its policy on independence of the audit committee in Saudi Arabia to external, non-director members.

Compensation

In Canada, say on pay proposals that receive the support of less than 80 percent of votes cast will trigger a responsiveness analysis the following year in order to align with recommendations from the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance.

ISS is also proposing a policy change to Continental European Benchmark policy to take into account the extent to which a company provides sufficiently clear limits to its derogation policy in analyzing the quality of the executive remuneration disclosure.

Comment Period

ISS included seven specific questions within its request for comment on its proposed policy changes, welcoming feedback from institutional investors, companies and other market constituents. Interested persons are asked to submit any comments via email to policy@issgovernance.com. The comment period will run through 5:00 p.m. ET on November 16, 2021.

The climate-related proposals are reproduced below.

Climate-related Proposed Policies

Board Accountability on Climate

General Recommendation: For companies that are significant greenhouse gas (GHG) emitters, through their operations or value chain, generally vote against or withhold from the responsible incumbent director, committee, or full board in cases where ISS determines that the company is not taking the minimum steps needed to understand, assess, and mitigate risks related to climate change to the company and the larger economy.

For 2022, minimum steps to understand and mitigate those risks are considered to be:

  • Detailed disclosure of climate-related risks, such as according to the framework established by the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD), including:
    • Board governance measures;
    • Corporate strategy;
    • Risk management analyses; and
    • Metrics and targets.
  • Appropriate GHG emissions reduction targets.

For 2022, “appropriate GHG emissions reductions targets” will be any well-defined GHG reduction targets. Targets for Scope 3 emissions will not be required for 2022 but the targets should cover at least a significant portion of the company’s direct emissions. Expectations about what constitutes “minimum steps to mitigate risks related to climate change” will increase over time.

Say on Climate (SoC) Management Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on management proposals that request shareholders to approve the company’s climate transition action plan, taking into account the completeness and rigor of the plan. Information that will be considered where available includes the following:

The extent to which the company’s climate related disclosures are in line with TCFD recommendations and meet other market standards;

  • Disclosure of its operational and supply chain GHG emissions (Scopes 1, 2, and 3);
  • The completeness and rigor of company’s short-, medium-, and long-term targets for reducing operational and supply chain GHG emissions (Scopes 1, 2, and 3 if relevant);
  • Whether the company has sought and approved third-party approval that its targets are science-based;
  • Whether the company has made a commitment to be “net zero emissions” for operational and supply chain emissions (Scopes 1, 2, and 3) by 2050;
  • Whether the company discloses a commitment to report on the implementation of its plan in subsequent years,
  • Whether the company’s climate data has received third-party assurance,
  • Disclosure of how the company’s lobbying activities and its capital expenditures align with company strategy,
  • Whether there are specific industry decarbonization challenges, and
  • The company’s related commitment, disclosure, and performance compared to its industry peers.
Say on Climate (SoC) Shareholder Proposals

General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on shareholder proposals that request the company to disclose a report providing its GHG emissions levels and reduction targets and/or its upcoming/approved climate transition action plan and provide shareholders the opportunity to regularly express approval or disapproval of its GHG emissions reduction plan, taking into account information such as the following:

  • The completeness and rigor of the company’s climate-related disclosure;
  • The company’s actual GHG emissions performance;
  • Whether the company has been the subject of recent, significant violations, fines, litigation, or controversy related to its GHG emissions; and
  • Whether the proposal’s request is unduly burdensome (scope or timeframe) or overly prescriptive.

Share This Insight

Previous Entries

Speaking Sustainability

February 19, 2025

Wind energy projects along the coasts are facing uncertainty due to President Trump’s Presidential Memorandum1 issued on January 20, “Temporary Withdrawal of All Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from Offshore Wind Leasing and Review of the Federal Government’s Leasing and Permitting Practices for Wind Projects.” This Memorandum introduces substantial policy changes that impact both onshore and offshore wind development.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

January 24, 2025

Beginning on Monday, there have been a flurry of executive orders from the Trump administration reversing Biden-era energy policies, emphasizing oil and gas production, lifting the liquified natural gas (LNG) export permitting pause and withdrawing from all accords and commitments under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) including the Paris climate agreement. The orders also target electric vehicles (EVs), wind energy, international climate aid and the use of the social cost of carbon in agency decision making. For close tracking of these orders and more to come, visit the Akin Trump Executive Order tracker. Concurrently, President Trump’s nominees for the Department of the Interior (DOI), Department of Energy (DOE) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have each passed their initial rounds of committee confirmation votes, and now await votes before the Senate floor.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

January 10, 2025

In the final days of his term, President Joe Biden has taken significant steps to solidify his administration’s climate legacy. The administration finalized rules for various clean energy tax credits established under the Inflation Reduction Act. However, these rules, intended to stimulate clean energy advancements through 2032, face opposition from Congressional Republicans, who are considering scaling back or repealing the credits through budget reconciliation.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

December 19, 2024

The twilight hours of the Biden administration and the 118th Congress have been marked by intense legislative and regulatory activity, underscored by President-elect Trump’s derailment of last-minute congressional budget talks, and stalled progress on energy permitting reforms.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

December 11, 2024

The Biden administration’s environmental policies and the future of infrastructure projects are facing pivotal legal challenges and political shifts. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit questioned the viability of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) 2024 power plant emissions rule, particularly its reliance on carbon capture technology, while the 6th Circuit overturned the EPA’s rejection of Kentucky’s smog plan, which comes only three days after the EPA issued its defense of its “good neighbor” smog control plan responding to the Supreme Court’s decision to halt its implementation in June. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court’s handling of the first National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) case in some time, Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County, could substantially alter the scope of environmental reviews, with potential immediate implications for the oil & gas industry. These judicial reviews may be influenced by a potential change in administration and Congress, as Trump-era officials, including Vivek Ramaswamy, advocate for scaling back NEPA regulations to expedite infrastructure projects. Additionally, the Department of Energy’s recent clarity on liquified natural gas (LNG) export authorizations underscores the broader tension between expanding fossil fuel infrastructure and adhering to environmental regulations amidst a polarized political and legal landscape.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

October 3, 2024

NYC Climate Week included over 900 events with an estimated 100,000 participants swarming the City. While indicative of growing interest in climate action, some note that the record turnout foreshadows a smaller presence at COP 29 in Azerbaijan.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

September 19, 2024

Recent legislative and regulatory developments reflect ongoing tensions between environmental policies and economic priorities in the U.S. energy landscape. The House Energy and Commerce Committee’s advancement of three resolutions targeting Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules on power plants, vehicle emissions and air quality standards marks a broader Republican effort to counter President Biden’s environmental agenda, though these resolutions face likely vetoes. In contrast, House Speaker Mike Johnson has signaled openness to retaining certain green energy tax credits, reflecting a pragmatic approach as some Republican districts benefit from these investments. Simultaneously, bipartisan efforts to boost critical mineral production, led by Senators Hickenlooper and Tillis, aim to reduce U.S. reliance on Chinese imports, while the White House has raised tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and solar products, a move seen as both protective of domestic industries and potentially disruptive to supply chains. Legal battles continue, as seen in the judicial blocking of the Interior Department’s methane rule in five states and ongoing litigation over EPA’s cross-state pollution rule, which the agency has been allowed to revise. Meanwhile, grid operators have expressed concerns that the EPA’s carbon emissions rule could threaten power plant operations, pushing for legal revisions to protect grid reliability. Together, these developments reflect the broader debate over balancing environmental regulations with economic and energy security concerns.

...

Read More

Speaking Sustainability

September 12, 2024

After a recent permitting reform bill was passed out of a Senate Committee, House Republicans took steps to draft their own permitting reform legislation. Rep. Westerman (R- AR) held a hearing to discuss his draft bill, which most notably places limitations on the environmental permitting process for energy projects. This comes as both parties position energy policy as a key election issue, with Vice President Harris recognizing a role for oil and gas production during the Presidential debate in response to Republican criticism of her climate policies. Meanwhile, former President Trump vowed to pull back unspent dollars approved for greenhouse gas reduction and energy transition projects under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The IRA has already spurred significant renewable energy investment, particularly in rural electric co-ops using the funds to replace coal generation with clean energy and battery storage.

...

Read More

© 2025 Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney advertising. This document is distributed for informational use only; it does not constitute legal advice and should not be used as such. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Akin is the practicing name of Akin Gump LLP, a New York limited liability partnership authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority under number 267321. A list of the partners is available for inspection at Eighth Floor, Ten Bishops Square, London E1 6EG. For more information about Akin Gump LLP, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP and other associated entities under which the Akin Gump network operates worldwide, please see our Legal Notices page.