I’ll start by setting the record straight on the statistics Langert cites. He claims that As You Sow filed eight shareholder resolutions in 2015, none breaking 4 percent support and none resulting in a withdrawal. In fact, we filed or co-filed 35 resolutions in 2015, with average votes exceeding 25 percent, a strong outcome for environmentally focused shareholder resolutions.

For those resolutions where As You Sow was the lead filer, shares voted in support were valued at over $183 billion. We successfully negotiated withdrawals at Costco, Dunkin’ Brands Group and General Mills; As You Sow has a strong record of coming to agreements with companies that lead to withdrawal of shareholder resolutions. This information is readily available on our website.  

Langert drew his information from the CERES data base, which is not intended to be a comprehensive list of ESG proposals but as a listing of resolutions relating to climate and some sustainability issues. A comprehensive list of ESG filings is available annually from the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) and from Proxy Preview (a publication of As You Sow with partners Si2 and Proxy Impact).

We pride ourselves on having our facts and economic analysis completely accurate in these public documents. We know that corporate attorneys will be looking for any reason to ask the SEC to not allow the resolution to go to a vote. In fact, many companies challenge resolutions whether there is cause or not. Last year As You Sow defended eight such challenges at the SEC, winning seven. 

Langert suggests that As You Sow’s filing at Abbott Labs on GMOs was a "wrong target." Yet with just a 6 percent vote, the company agreed to introduce a non-GMO version of its Similac infant formula, which is now on store shelves.

As You Sow’s innovative climate resolutions sometimes earn strong votes and sometimes earn lower votes, but always introduce important new concepts to investors. For example, last year we filed a groundbreaking resolution at Chevron in collaboration with Arjuna Capital, which earned a low vote, but introduced the idea that shareholder capital is being wasted by continuing to invest in high cost, high carbon reserves that are likely to be stranded.

Ideas are powerful and even low votes can change the narrative and shift attitudes and policy. Nearly every major shareholder-driven corporate change started with a novel resolution, which As You Sow is particularly well known for introducing. Resolutions that push the envelope can require time and investor education to resonate and build consensus; they highlight important areas of business risk and often see increased shareholder support in subsequent years, resulting in critical corporate changes.

Langert surely must appreciate how As You Sow recently helped his alma mater, McDonald’s, eliminate 770 million polystyrene coffee cups per year at 14,000 stores, as well as our leading role for more than three years in a coalition of investors that co-developed "Project Kaleidoscope: a collaborative and dynamic approach to code of conduct compliance" to solve labor issues related to production of McDonald’s Happy Meal Toys. 

The goal of shareholder advocates is not a vote or a withdrawal. The goal is to put forth new ideas and to work with companies to make real changes in corporate policy and practice that last over the long term. I speak for As You Sow and for our colleagues when I say that we advocate diligently and fearlessly on behalf of shareholders based on science and sound corporate environmental and social responsibility considerations. Our actions are founded on long-term strategic thinking. We hope that those observing our activities will take a more nuanced look at the important work that we do. I invite Langert to work with us to understand the goals, approaches and impact of shareholder advocacy, eliminate the myths and bring forth a new era of greater innovation and collaboration between companies and their shareholder advocates.