Shareholders reject Woodside Energy’s transition strategy
At the company’s AGM, 58% of shareholders opposed the company’s transition plan
Woodside Energy, one of Australia’s largest oil and gas companies is facing an unprecedented degree of shareholder opposition to its climate transition plan with more than half of shareholders voting to oppose the board's proposals. In the buildup to the 2024 annual general meeting, such investor pressure had also targeted Woodside’s chairman - Richard Goyder.
Several asset owners had voiced their concerns regarding the company’s transition plan, ahead of the annual general meeting on April 24 in Perth, Australia.
Growing dissent
“There was a global groundswell of public dissent against Woodside’s climate plan ahead of today’s AGM. It was rejected by all major proxy advisory firms, at least three major Australian superannuation funds, some of the United States’ biggest pension funds, Norway’s largest private pension fund, and Britain’s biggest asset manager”, says Harriet Kater, head of impact at the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ACCR) – a shareholder advocacy organisation.
"The scale of this rejection is globally unprecedented. With 58.4% of investors voting against, this is the least-supported climate plan ever. The fact that the previous record of 49% was also held by Woodside speaks to this board’s persistent unresponsiveness" she added.
At the 2024 AGM, 58.4% of shareholders opposed Woodside’s transition strategy.
Woodside’s chief executive Meg O’Neill defended the company’s transition plan at the AGM. O’Neill claims Woodside is on-track to meet its targets of reducing scope 1 and 2 emissions by 15% by 2025 and 30% by 2030.
These targets have come under scrutiny for their credibility. The company’s announced investments cast doubt over how these targets will be met. By some estimates, over 80% of Woodside’s new capex is focused on fossil fuels.
“There remains a significant gap between the current plan and a 1.5 degree transition pathway”, said Debby Blakey, CEO of HESTA, an Australian super fund that voted against the plan.
Company management is convinced that is not the case. “In 2023 we reduced our net equity emissions to 12.5 % below our starting base. We achieved this by designing and operating out emissions and using carbon credits as offsets”, O’Neill stated at the AGM.
It is a world first for an incumbent chair of a major oil and gas company to face the threat of being held personally accountable for company climate failings
Individual accountability
Investors are also holding Woodside’s chairman accountable for their concerns. 16.61% of shareholders voted against Richard Goyder’s re-election. Over a 20-year period, that is the highest recorded vote against a Woodside chair.
Speaking at the AGM, Goyder acknowledged investor concerns related to the company’s climate risk mismanagement. “For the board and executive leadership of Woodside, we view our response to climate change not only as a responsibility, but a great opportunity”, he said. In a letter addressed to shareholders on 16 April, Goyder had opposed some of these climate-related shareholder concerns:
“We are concerned that some stakeholders' and investors' requests to drastically change Woodside's strategy and investment priorities risk eroding value for all shareholders and contributing to a disorderly energy transition”, the letter stated.
Goyder survived the shareholder revolt which critics claim is both surprising and concerning. “It is a world first for an incumbent chair of a major oil and gas company to face the threat of being held personally accountable for company climate failings”, said Brynn O’Brien, ACCR’s executive director.
