The vast majority of shareholder resolutions fail to achieve a majority (>50%) support. In fact, most shareholder resolutions are considered a 'success' anytime they garner any substantial amount of vote (>10%), and the company will usually take preemptive actions to address the issue when resolutions reach that level[0].
One thing most people don't realize is these votes are all non-binding. Companies have no legal obligation to do anything based on shareholder resolutions. Essentially they're a big survey.
Companies want to serve their shareholders -- that's the whole point. If the past is any indication, this effort will drive Amazon to substantially improve its sustainability practices.
_____
[0] From one of my working papers:
Proposals that do not achieve majority vote can still have impact by opening up a dialogue. Glac (2010) presents an example of a proposal asking Amoco to adopt the Valdez environmental principles which only got 8.6% approval, but Amoco began to shift environmental policies. A similar proposal the next year was withdrawn because of Amoco’s policy shift. Sometimes, the media impact of a failed vote can lead to future progress. For example, Guay et al. (2004) argue that the media impact of a resolution filed with Talisman on operations in Sudan led the company to withdraw a year later.
In my experience, "using a science-based approach" translates to "maximizing shareholder value" with plausible deniability.
Large data centers are strong candidates for renewable energy conversions because they need backup power regardless. If the "backup power" is supplied by renewables then that becomes the primary generation source and the power grid becomes the backup. Doing it that way is sustainable and profitable.
It's arguably a problem when short-term profit seeking causes long-term damage.
Source: I know a guy who got spammed.
Check out the AFL-CIO Executive Paywatch [1], can you imagine retail investors approving executive compensation to the rate of 200x or even 5900x (in the case of Weight Watchers) median employee pay? Those executive compensation votes usually pass without much more than a squeak from a couple of small investors or activist fund managers who typically get trounced when it comes time to vote.
Even if it's seemingly pointless, I always read the proposals and vote. It's also a great way to learn and get a sense of what's going on at the companies you are invested in.
[0] http://buzz.money.cnn.com/2014/06/12/shareholders-dont-vote/
It's actually becoming rather a problem because you have these gigantic containers of wealth but there is no one captaining the ship who can do anything bold with it, because that requires shareholder approval but the underlying shareholders don't even know what companies they own much less have any idea what comes up for a vote. Meanwhile the fund managers are the most conservative people imaginable and are far more interested in stable returns than making the world a better place, so the entities that have the resources for moonshots don't have the stones to actually attempt them.
This leads to the rather interesting insight that the current direction and actions of of Alpha/Google/YouTube etc have been ultimately under the exclusive control of Brin and Page; similarly for Zuckerberg/Facebook. These companies' actions give the most honest insight possible into their owners' worldviews. Not the most comforting thought.
Fundamentally, we believe it's unrealistic to expect them to pay attention, so we're trying to build an experience where they sync their accounts, demonstrate what they care about, and then we pay attention for them via push notifications. Would love to hear your feedback! www.yourstake.org.
You have actually given another premise to my argument. The world's resources (represented in paper money) is not being used to benefit the world, if fact, it's being used to lobby gov't to remove subsidies on renewable energy.
Feudal lords own the land just like today's capitalists (especially the whales) own capital.
"6 people own a share of a bookshop" isn't really an analogy.
