Saturday, September 9, 2017
It's Saturday morning, and I'm guessing a lot of us are watching apprehensively as Irma heads for Florida (others of us are probably trying desperately to escape the storm's path, possibly receiving an impromptu lesson in dynamic pricing). Meanwhile, Jose and Katia are close behind, even as Houston faces years-long recovery efforts from Harvey, and then there's, well:
It's impossible to consider these events - which, in addition to the human toll, will inflict billions if not trillions of dollars of damage - without thinking that this is what climate change looks like.
The reason I mention it on this blog is that climate change is an increasingly popular subject for shareholder proposals. More and more, shareholders are seeking information from companies about how they are responding to climate change, including the precautions being taken, and the expected costs of disasters.
Considering that we are now being treated to a dramatic demonstration of just how climate change can have a devastating impact on economies generally and individual companies in particular, isn't it time for critics of the shareholder proposal mechanism to at least admit that climate change proposals belong in the "corporate governance" category, and not the oft-derided "social policy" category, the latter of which is alleged to have only an"attenuated connection to shareholder value"?