'Change the world, buy shell?' : the case of follow this and Shell : a study on activities and rhetoric of Dutch investors in the advancement of environmental and social governance performance

(1)

‘CHANGE

THE

WORLD,

BUY

SHELL?’:

THE

CASE

OF

FOLLOW

THIS

AND

SHELL

A

STUDY ON ACTIVITIES AND RHETORIC OF

D

UTCH

INVESTORS IN THE ADVANCEMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL AND

SOCIAL GOVERNANCE PERFORMANCE

LIONEL

PLANDSOEN

1056682 Master Thesis Political Science- International Relations

(2)

(3)

2

‘Change the World, Buy Shell?’: The Case of Follow This and Shell

A study on the activities and rhetoric of Dutch investors in the advancement of

environmental and social governance performance

Master Thesis Political Science – International Relations

Research project: Corporate Responsibility and Authority in Global Governance Date: 22/06/2018

Lionel Plandsoen – 10565582 Supervisor: L. Fransen Second reader: R. Pistorius Word count: 18.250

(4)

(5)

4

List of abbreviations

ABP - Algemeen Burgerlijk Pensioenfonds (Pension Fund for Civil Servants) AGM- Annual General Meeting

CEO- Chief Executive Officer CO2- Carbon Dioxide

ESG- Environmental and Social Governance GHG- Greenhouse Gas

NGO- Non-Governmental Organization

PME- Pensioenfonds Metalelektro (Pension Fund for Metal and Electronics) SMO- Social Movement Organization

VBDO - Vereniging van Beleggers voor Duurzame Ontwikkeling (Dutch Association of Investors for Sustainable Development)

(8)

7

1. Introduction

The financial market is increasingly used to influence corporate social and environmental responsibility (Sjöström, 2008: 142). In the Netherlands, an example of how these influences are put in practice, is the shareholder association Follow This. This association of ‘green’ shareholders has the objective to transform Shell into a sustainable energy company (Follow This, 2015). This means that Follow This attempts to influence Shell’s policies and practices from their position of ownership.

This influencing happens through the phenomenon of ‘shareholder engagement’. This relates to ‘a strategy of using shareholder influence to promote environmental and social governance (ESG) performance (Vanderkerkhove et al., 2007). However, in the academic literature the discussion exists whether shareholder engagement is an effective strategy in order to persuade corporations to adopt or enhance corporate responsibility practices and activities (Sjöström, 2008: 142). While some authors are positive about the possibilities of shareholder engagements to influence corporate behavior (Vasi & King, 2012; Rubinstein Malamuld, 2016), others are more skeptic about this (O’Rourke, 2003; Haigh & Hazelton, 2004). Nonetheless, an area, which can contribute to this debate, remains unexplored. The role of language and argumentations remains undertheorized.

So far, a few scholars have paid attention to the role of language in shareholder engagements (James & Gifford, 2010; Ferraro & Buenza, 2014; Ivanova, 2016) They discovered that the issue that is addressed by shareholders is reframed in business terms. Nonetheless, these studies focused only on how shareholders influence the corporation, but did not pay any attention to how shareholders, which promote a particular ESG agenda, attempt to persuade their fellow shareholders through their activities as well as their rhetorics. This is a missed opportunity, because when shareholders act as a collective it could result in pressure for companies to adjust their behavior (Ferraro & Buenza, 2014). Therefore, the following research question will be examined in this study: ‘What kind of activities and

rhetoric do Dutch investors employ in order to convince the management and fellow

shareholders of oil companies to advance the ESG performance?’. The aim of this question,

is to contribute to the existing debate of effectiveness of shareholder engagement, by taking into account how fellow shareholders are persuaded to favor a particular ESG agenda. This research is conducted through a case study of the shareholders association Follow This that is based in the Netherlands. This case is chosen because their aim is, as said before, to transform Shell into a sustainable energy company. This is not only done by targeting the management of Shell, but also fellow shareholders. The research is based on qualitative

(9)

8 methods. The data is namely collected through a qualitative content analysis of twenty

documents and two media items; three participant observations; and six conducted semi-structured interviews. The research has a descriptive purpose because the role of language in shareholder engagement and the impact on fellow investors has not received sufficient

scholarly attention. The objective of this study is to illustrate why fellow shareholders support a particular ESG agenda and how the targeted company reacts on the proposed agenda. In this way, the study reveals the motives and actions of fellow shareholders and the

counterarguments and actions of the opposition.

This research discovers that Follow This employs different activities to advocate their agenda, of which the most important is their shareholders resolution. It also exposes that in these activities, Follow This reframes the issue in business terms. This is done through emphasizing the business opportunities of acting on climate change, and more crucially, stressing the financial risks of not acting on climate change. It also reveals that this reframing of the issue, is part of a process which aims to persuade potential adherents of their agenda. Moreover, it identifies that these arguments are not isolated, but are part of an existing discourse within the Dutch financial market with regard to ESG issues.

In addition, this study reveals that the activities and rhetoric of Follow This have an impact on fellow investors by moving them into action through at least take a position to the issue. Finally, it discovers that the activities and rhetoric of Follow This, combined with the pressure of fellow shareholders resulted in action on the part of Shell. However, more importantly, it produced a discussion within the company about how the business strategy should look in order to align with the Paris Climate Agreement.

The remainder of this thesis is as follows. In Chapter 2 the theory of this thesis is outlined. In this chapter the literature on the concept of shareholder engagement will be reviewed; the analytical framework will be elaborated; and the concept of discourse is explained. Chapter 3, contains the research design of this thesis, and reflects on data gathering, used methods and reliability and validity of this study. Chapter 4 serves as a background chapter, in which will be described what Follow This is. The Chapters 5 to 8 will reveal the empirical results of this study. In these chapters it will be revealed, ‘which

activities are employed by Follow This?’; ‘how does Follow This frame the issue in their activities?’; ‘how do fellow investors react on the activities and rhetoric of Follow This?’; and ‘how Shell does react on the activities and rhetoric of Follow This?’. The final chapter, will provide a summary of the results of this research, and carefully reflect on its contribution to

(10)

9 the academic discussion.

(11)

10

2. Theoretical section

In this section the concepts and theory that will be used to understand, interpret and analyze the results will be discussed. This section consists of three parts. The first section will concentrate on the conceptualization of ‘shareholder engagement’. In doing so, it will give a brief literature review on this concept. Moreover, it will describe how authors in the scholarly literature discusses how shareholders exert influence on corporations and elaborate the

existing discussion about the impact of shareholder engagement.

The second part will describe the analytical framework that will be deployed in this thesis. In this section, framing theory will be explained. This theory originates from Benford and Snow (1986; 1992; 2000). While describing this theory, the conceptualization of framing, the core framing tasks and two of the three framing processes that are identified by Benford and Snow (2000) will be discussed. In the final section, the concept of discourse will be defined. In addition, a brief description of discourse in the financial market will be provided.

2.1 Shareholder engagement

In this subsection an overview on the academic literature on shareholder engagement will be provided. This subsection is made up of two parts. In the first part the concept of shareholder engagement will be conceptualized. In addition, attention will be given to the formal as well as the informal shareholder rights. Finally, in the second part the existing discussion with regard to the effectiveness of shareholder engagement will be outlined.

2.1.1 Shareholder engagement: Conceptualization and shareholder rights

In the academic literature, there exists uncertainty regarding the terminology of ‘shareholder engagement’ or ‘shareholder activism’ (Sjöström, 2008; Wagemans et al., 2013). For this thesis, the definition of Vanderkerckhove et al. (2007) will be followed. As is mentioned in the introduction, ‘shareholder engagement’ relates to a strategy of using shareholder influence to promote environmental and social governance (ESG) performance. Engagement can be exercised in a formal way as well as in an informal way. Formal shareholder influence refers to filling resolutions, letter writing, and asking questions at the annual general meeting (AGM), whereas informal shareholder influence relates to dialogues with the corporate management (Wagemans et al., 2013).

According to the academic literature, the formal and informal ways of shareholder engagement give some insights in the mechanisms that are used in shareholder engagement.

(12)

11 These mechanisms refer to what characterizes shareholder engagement, namely using the power of the ‘voice’ rather than the power of disinvestment (Goodman et al., 2014).

Hirschman argues that the ‘voice’ represents a political response using communication in an attempt to improve performance failures (Hirschman, 1970; in Goodman et al., 2014: 195). As noted above, the ‘voice’ is used in formal ways as well as in informal ways, in order that corporations invest shareholders’ capital in a responsible way. Furthermore, the ‘voice’ can be used as a form of public confrontation with firms (Goodman et al., 2014: 196).

The scholarly literature argues that ‘voice’ is used by all types of investors. On the one hand, large investors, such as pension funds, use the power of ‘voice’ rather than

disinvestment, because they lack ‘flexibility’ on the financial market (Willems, 2017: 12). On the other hand, small investors use the power of ‘voice’ as well. Although they can be more ‘flexible’ on the capital market, engagement may provide small investors with the ability to make a change and promote better ESG performance (Goodman et al., 2014: 206).

2.1.2 Shareholder engagement: Effectiveness

Yet, within the academic literature there exists a debate whether shareholder engagement is effective in order to influence corporate behavior. On the one hand, some scholars argue that it is effective to pressure corporations. One example of this, is the study of Vasi and King (2012). They argue that activism initiated by shareholders has a greater effect on ESG

performance than activism initiated by firm outsiders (Vasi & King, 2012: 575). This finding is supported by Liza Rubinstein Malamud (2016). In her study on Dutch shareholder

associations, she demonstrates that shareholders can influence investee companies directly as well as indirectly (Rubinstein Malamud, 2016: 5).

According to her this happens in two ways. First, corporations are influenced directly, because they need to develop organizational responses to the questions of shareholders at the annual general meeting. This leads to position-taking of organizations on issues, and

occasionally to the decision to adopt corporate governance related suggestions (ibid.). Second, corporations are influenced indirectly, because shareholder engagements can serve as a source for employee activists. Employees who are sympathetic to shareholders’ opinions, use the engagement to sell the issues up to higher management. This may happen without the awareness of shareholders. Moreover, employee activists may collaborate with shareholders by instructing them how to frame questions at the annual general meeting, or even which issues to address (ibid).

(13)

12 Nevertheless, other scholars are more skeptical about the effectiveness of shareholder engagements on corporate behavior. For example, Haigh and Hazelton assert that shareholder engagements do not have the power to establish corporate change, because most resolutions are unsuccessful. This entails that most resolutions receive a minority vote, and as a result of that they are not accepted (Haigh & Hazelton, 2004). Another author that is critical about shareholder engagements is Anastasia O’Rourke (2003). On the one hand, she argues that one of the benefits of shareholder engagements is, that it gives the opportunity to open up a debate on social and environmental issues within the company. On the other hand, she asserts that shareholder engagements are costly, and might lead to a hardened position on the part of companies. In addition, she claims that shareholder engagements only achieve modest and corporate specific adjustments, rather than more fundamental industrial change (O’Rourke 2003).

Apart from the above described controversy about the effectiveness of shareholder engagements, some scholars have proposed various ideas on which aspects of shareholder engagements can influence organizations. Some scholars suggest that the usage of moral pressure is a successful strategy (Ferraro & Buenza, 2013), while others argue that raising awareness on novel issues within the firm is a favorable tactic (Goodman et al., 2014; Ferraro & Buenza, 2014). A third mechanism, identified by academics, is that the success of

shareholders depends on the ability to frame issues in terms of a business case (James & Gifford, 2010; Ferraro & Buenza, 2014; Ivanova, 2016).

Despite the discovered tactic of reframing issues in business terms, the role of

language in shareholders engagements remains undertheorized. For example, Emma Sjöström suggests that shareholders use strategic framing of issues, in order to resonate with the

objectives of the targeted actors. Therefore, she argues that rhetoric, and especially framing, plays a central role in shareholder engagements (Sjöström, 2010: 189). As a result of this, in the next subsection the concept of framing will be discussed.

2.2 Analytical framework: Framing theory

In this subsection the analytical framework of this thesis will be explained. It comprises of three parts. In the first part the concept of framing and the idea of collective action frames will be elaborated. Thereupon, the notion of the core framing tasks of Benford and Snow (1992) will be clarified. Finally, in the third part attention will be given to the idea of framing as a

(14)

13 strategic and contested process. While doing so, specific thought will be given to the strategic processes, which are defined by Benford and Snow (2000) as frame alignment processes.

2.2.1 Analytical framework: The concept of framing and collective action frames In the academic literature, the concept of framing as well as the process of framing have received considerable attention. Since the concept was introduced by the work of Goffman (1974), the concept of framing has been used for the examination of social movements and collective action. Social movement scholars view framing as the construction of meaning. According to Benford & Snow, this means that framing is ‘an active, processual phenomenon that implies agency and contention at the level of reality construction’ (Benford & Snow, 2000: 614). They argue that it is active, because ‘something is being done’. In addition, they claim it is processual, because it is a ‘dynamic evolving process’. Moreover, they assert that it implies agency, since ‘what is evolving is the work of social movements or movements activists’. In the end, they claim it is contentious, as a result of that ‘it involves the generation of interpretive frames that not only differ from existing ones but may also challenge them’ (ibid.). They state that the results of this framing activity are defined as “collective action frames” (ibid.).

As noted above, the concept of framing was developed by Goffman (1974). He viewed frames as ‘“schemata of interpretation” that allow individuals ‘to locate, perceive, identity and label’ occurrences within their life space and world at large’ (Goffman, 1974: 21; in Benford & Snow, 2000: 614). Frames help to make ‘events or occurrences meaningful’ and operate to ‘organize experience’ and ‘guide action’ (Benford & Snow, 2000: 614). Benford and Snow assert that collective action frames fulfill the same interpretative function, by ‘simplifying and condensing’ components of the ‘world out there’. Yet, this happens in ways that are meant to mobilize potential supporters and constituents, to accumulate support from bystanders, and to demobilize opposition (ibid.). Therefore, they claim that ‘collective action frames are action-oriented sets of beliefs and meanings that inspire and legitimate the

activities and campaigns of a social movement organizations (SMO)’(ibid.).

According to Benford and Snow, collective action frames consist of two features. The first feature relates to the ‘core framing tasks’, which entails the SMO’s action-oriented function (ibid.: 615). The second component refers to ‘the interactive, discursive processes that attend these core framing tasks and thus are generative of collective action frames’ (ibid.). Both core features of the collective action frames will be elaborated in the following subsections.

(15)

14 2.2.2 Analytical framework: Core framing tasks of collective action frames

As stated in the previous section, collective action frames consist of two features. The first feature entails the core framing tasks. Benford and Snow argue that that collective action frame tasks is made up of three components. They state that:

‘collective action frames are constructed in part as movements adherents negotiate a shared understanding of some problematic condition or situation they define as need of change, make attributions regarding who or what is to blame, articulate an alternative set of arrangements and urge others to act in concert of change’ (Snow & Benford, 2000: 615).

The first core framing task is ‘diagnostic framing’, which relates to the ‘identification of a problem and the attribution of blame or causality’ (Snow & Benford, 1992: 200). It must be noted that consensus about problem identification is often achieved within social movements, while it is more problematic to achieve consensus about the causes. For instance, the peace movement viewed nuclear weapons as a problematic condition (diagnosis). Yet, there was disagreement about the causes. While some pointed to the technological causes of the nuclear threat, others blamed political factors, such as the anachronistic geopolitical structure, as the reason of nuclear danger (ibid.).

Subsequently, this disagreement has a consequence for the second core framing task, which is ‘prognostic framing’. Prognostic framing ‘not only suggest solutions to the problem but also identify strategies, tactics and targets’ (ibid.: 201). Continuing the above described example of the peace movement, there were different solutions proposed. One part advocated for the rejection of technology, while others were calling for bilateral negotiations and

treaties. Nevertheless, this seems to have no consequence for the final core framing task, which is ‘motivational framing’. Motivational framing provides a ‘call to arms or rationale for action’ (ibid.: 202). To stay with the example of the peace movements, their rationale

(motivational) for participation was framed in terms of moral considerations. They primarily pointed out to the fatality of nuclear weapons, by framing the horrifying consequences of nuclear weapons (ibid.: 203). In Table 1., a summary of the core framing tasks is provided.

Table 1. Overview of core framing tasks (Snow & Benford, 1992).

Core framing task: Definition:

Diagnosis Relates to the identification of a problem and the

attribution of blame or causality.

Prognosis Provides not only solutions to the problem but also

identifies strategies, tactics and targets.

(16)

15 2.2.3 Analytical framework: Framing as strategic and contested process

As noted in section 2.2.1, the second feature of collective action frames is ‘the interactive, discursive processes that attend to these core framing tasks and thus are generative of collective action frames’ (Benford & Snow, 2000: 615). This is in accordance with the assumption of which framing theory draw upon, namely resonance. This assumption entails that despite how effective the framer conducts the core framing tasks; the deployed frame needs to align with the target. Benford and Snow identify three types of processes. The first processes are the discursive processes, which relate to how frames are generated (ibid.: 623). However, in this thesis it will not be discussed how frames are generated. Therefore, only the strategic and contested processes will be discussed.

Benford and Snow (2000) define the strategic processes as:

‘framing processes that are deliberative, utilitarian and goal directed: Frames are

developed and deployed to achieve a specific purpose such as, to recruit new members, to mobilize adherents, to require resources and so forth’ (ibid.: 624).

The interests and the interpretative frames of the SMO are linked with those of potential supporters. Benford and Snow conceptualize this as frame alignment. They recognize four processes of alignment.

The first process of frame alignment is frame bridging. This relates to ‘linking of two or more ideologically congruent but structurally unconnected frames regarding a particular issue or problem’ (ibid.). Bridging can be done at the organizational level as well as on the individual level by linking two unconnected but suitable frames. An example of this process is given in a previous work of Snow et al. (1986). They illustrate that the Christian Right in the United States made use of frame bridging by using mass media, such as mailing, to raise capital and recruit new members for their movement by targeting other conservative

movement members in the United States (Snow et al., 1986: 468). Thus, this illustrates that by frame bridging SMO’s attempt to gain more support, resources or mobilize supporters from public that share the same values, norms and beliefs.

The second frame alignment process is frame amplification, which means ‘the idealization, embellishment, clarification or invigoration of existing values or beliefs’

(Benford & Snow, 2000: 624.). Frame alignment can take two forms (Snow et al., 1986: 469). First it can take the shape of value amplification, which refers to ‘promoting or idealizing preexisting values that were previously considered basic and not highlighted e.g. justice or cooperation’ (Himick & Audousset-Coulier, 2016: 542). The second form is belief

(17)

16 or about the probability of change’ (Himick & Audousset-Coulier, 2016: 542). The goal of these types of framing is ‘to seduce the target audience by talking their language by

connecting to their goals and values’ (Verloo 2001, 9; in Himick & Audousset-Coulier, 2016: 542).

Frame extension is the third frame alignment process, which is defined as ‘depicting a SMO’s interests and frame(s) as extending beyond its primary interests to include issues and concerns that are presumed to be of importance to potential adherents’ (Benford & Snow, 2000: 625). In doing so, the movement attempts to increase its support by outlining its aims or activities as being harmonious with the values and interests of potential supporters (Snow et al, 1986: 472). This requires the identification of values and interests of potential supporters, and these values and interests needs to be aligned with the participation in movement

activities (ibid.). An example of frame extension is the peace movement in the United States. This movement made use of frame extension in order to gain more support from ethnic minorities. They attempted this by, ‘promoting social justice by nonviolently confronting racism, sexism and all other forms of oppression’ (ibid.).

Frame transformation is the final strategic alignment frame process. This relates to the ‘the radical and “systematic” alternation of a primary framework to incorporate the standpoint of another frame’ (Himick & Audousset-Coulier, 2016: 542). Transformation occurs on the occasion, ‘when two opposed frames do not find much resonance’ and turn out to be contradictory (ibid.). When this is the case new values can be utilized, and older values are eliminated. This results in ‘reframing’ (ibid.). In Table 2., a summary of the alignment process is provided.

Table 2. Summary of the frame alignment processes (Benford & Snow, 2000).

Frame alignment process: Definition:

Frame bridging Linking of two or more ideologically congruent but

structurally unconnected frames regarding a particular issue or problem.

Frame amplification The idealization, embellishment, clarification or

invigoration of existing values or beliefs.

Frame extension Depicting a SMO’s interests and frame(s) as

extending beyond its primary interests to include issues and concerns that are presumed to be of importance to potential adherents.

Frame transformation The radical and “systematic” alternation of a primary

framework to incorporate the standpoint of another frame.

(18)

17 Nevertheless, Benford and Snow argue that, ‘the development and generation and elaboration of collective action frames are contested processes’ (Benford & Snow, 2000: 625). It is a contested process, because those who engage in framing activities face various challenges. The most significant challenge is counterframing by movement opponents, bystanders and media (ibid.). Counterframing, which refers to ‘attempts to rebut, undermine, or neutralize a person’s or groups myths version of reality or interpretative framework’ (Benford, 1987: 75; in Benford & Snow, 2000: 626), is done by challenging the diagnostic and prognostic frames that are deployed by the SMO (Benford & Snow, 2000: 626). In doing so, the counterframes of the opponents produce reframe activity by the SMO, which results in a ‘framing

contest’(ibid.).

To conclude, this analytical framework, allows the author to investigate which frames are mobilized by the examined organization. In doing so, it is possible to discover the

diagnosis, prognosis and motivational frames as well as the structural processes of frame alignment. Moreover, it is possible to examine the counterframes that are utilized by the opponents of the examined organization. In the end, this must lead to the discovery of which discourse is present in the particular institutional context. In the next section, the concept of discourse will be elaborated and discussed further.

2.3 Discourse on the financial market

In this subsection, the academic literature on the discourse with regard to ESG issues on the financial market will be discussed. This subsection consists of three parts. In the first part the concept of discourse will be defined. Subsequently, an overview of the academic literature that concentrated on the discourse in shareholder engagement will be debated. In the end, an argument will be made in advance as a result of the conducted empirical observations. In addition, the sub-research questions will be elaborated in this section.

2.3.1 Discourse on the financial market: Conceptualizing discourse

As rhetoric has a crucial role in this thesis, it is required to explain the concept of discourse. A rhetoric is made up of frames. These frames are not isolated but an aspect of the

environment in which they perform. This means that frames are not predetermined but affected by the discursive structure in which they operate, because to resonate with the targeted actors they need to be part of the environment in which they operate (Dombos et al., 2012: 5). This means thus that frames are part of a discourse.

(19)

18 In the academic literature, there does not exist a clear definition of the concept

discourse. While some authors define discourse at its simplest as ‘a particular way of talking and understanding the world (or an aspect of the world)’ (Phillips & Jørgensen, 2002 :1), or as a ‘system of texts that bring an object into being’ (Tregidga & Milne, 2006: 224). Other scholars define discourse broader. For example, Maarten Hajer defines discourse as ‘an ensemble of ideas, concepts, and categories through which meaning is given to social and physical phenomena, and which is produced and reproduced through an identifiable set of practices’ (Hajer, 2006: 67).

For this thesis, discourse refers to a particular way of talking, through which meaning is given to social and physical phenomena. In addition, it is generated and regenerated through an identifiable set of practices. By defining discourse as such, it not only relates to ‘things thought, written or said about a particular subject but also to practices, structures, rules and norms that operate in particular institutional and social domains’ (Livesey & Kearins, 2002: 237). Thus, this conceptualization of discourse grants the author not only to examine speech and written texts but also the practices, structures, rules and norms that are present in the institutional setting.

2.3.2 Discourse in shareholder engagement: the business case

Previous studies have discovered that the success of shareholder engagement depends on the ability to frame issues in terms of a business case (James & Gifford, 2010; Solomon et al., 2011; Ferraro & Buenza, 2014; Ivanova, 2016). For example, Ferraro & Buenza argue that investors who want to advance ESG performance of a corporation, reframe the issue in business terms because ‘it provides a language for managers to safely discuss these issues internally, triggering more internal debate than the more divisive moral frame’ (Ferraro & Buenza, 2014: 31). This indicates that within the realm of the financial market, there exists a particular discourse.

So far, it is discovered by some academics, that this discourse is characterized by practices such as reporting on the financial risks as well as the business opportunities for the targeted object (Solomon et al., 2011; Ivanova, 2016). That risk and opportunities appear to be a characterization of the discourse in the financial market, is closely related to the idea of risk society, which originates from Beck. He views risks as ‘the modern approach to foresee and control the future consequences of human action, and the various unintended

consequences of modernization’ (Beck, 1999: 3; in Solomon et al.,2011: 1121). That financial risks play a significant role, in the economic realm of the United States and United Kingdom,

(20)

19 has also been revealed by scholars that have studied the discourse of environmental reporting of corporations (Spence 2007; Solomon et al., 2011). Overall, this suggests that the discourse of the financial market is distinguished by a particular way of talking and practices in a way that it concentrates on the business opportunities and, essentially, financial risks.

To sum up, in this section the concept of discourse is elaborated as a particular way of talking, through which meaning is given to social and physical phenomena. This is generated and regenerated through an identifiable set of practices. Moreover, previous studies have demonstrated that risks and business opportunities are characterizing elements of the discourse in the realm of the financial markets in the United States and United Kingdom.

2.3.3 Discourse on the financial market: Empirical observations

The literature has demonstrated that the discourse on ESG performance issues in the financial market of Anglo-Saxon countries focus on a business case type of reasoning. In this

argumentation, emphasize is not only put on the business opportunities of acting on an issue, but also, and more crucial, on the financial risks of a harmful practice of a company (James & Gifford, 2010; Solomon et al., 2011; Ferraro & Buenza, 2014; Ivanova, 2016)

Due to this insight, it is possible to make an identical argument in advance for the discourse in the Dutch financial market on ESG performance issues. Through the case study of Follow This, the argument will be made that the discourse in the Dutch financial market is characterized by a business type of reasoning in which the notion of risk is evident. It is namely observed in the empirics that Follow This employs a rhetoric, in which they reframe the issue in business terms. This is done by underlining the business opportunities of acting on climate change as well as, and more critical, stressing the financial risks of climate change. Thus, this means that Follow This focus in its argumentation on the financial aspects of climate change and not necessarily on the moral components of mitigating the harmful effects of climate change. Yet, they can still have an ethical motive.

This type of reasoning is part of a broader environment that is defined by the notion of risk, which shapes the reality and ‘provides conceptual guidance for actions, policy

prescriptions and institutional building’ (Spence, 2007: 858). That this is the case will be demonstrated through the following research question: ‘What kind of activities and rhetoric

do Dutch investors employ in order to convince the management and fellow shareholders of oil companies to advance the ESG performance?’. This question will be further elaborated in

the empirical section, in which the following sub-research questions are discussed: 1. Which activities are employed by Follow This?

(21)

20 2. How does Follow This frame the issue in their activities?

3. How do fellow investors react on the activities and rhetoric of Follow This? 4. How does Shell react on the activities and rhetoric of Follow This?

(22)

21

3. Methodology

This study makes use of an inductive qualitative approach. This means that theory is

generated from the observations. In other words, ‘the process of induction involves drawing inferences out of observations’ (Bryman, 2012: 26). This entails that in contrast to testing the validity of an explanation of a certain phenomenon, an inductive approach is an intermediate evaluation of the results that can provide suggestions for further research (Fransen, 2011: 170). The inductive approach is consistent with the aim of this study, which is to contribute to the understanding of shareholder engagements that has the objective to advance the ESG performance of companies on the Dutch financial market. Conducting the research

inductively has the advantage that it can provide the researcher with new insights because it is a bottom-up process (Ritchie et al., 2014: 6). Thus, an inductive qualitative approach makes it possible to explore unexpected explanations as well as outcomes, which could result in a more detailed picture of shareholder engagements in the Dutch financial market that aim to advance the ESG performance of oil companies.

3.1 Research design and sample

The design of the research is a single case study (N=1), because it concentrates on the rhetoric and activities that Follow This employs. It is expected that this case provides insights in the rhetoric that is present in shareholder engagements, which aim to advance the ESG

performance of oil companies. The case of Follow This is considered to be an interesting case, because the organization owns predominantly shares of Shell. This entails that they only are concentrated on Shell and not on other oil companies in the industry. As a result of that, it is expected that Follow This is increasingly involved in advancing the ESG performance of Shell. The case of Follow This is interesting, because since May 2017 the European Union adopted a directive which has the aim ‘to bring more long-term focus in corporate

governance’ (Sikora-Wittnebel et al., 2017: 3). This entails that this directive aims to realize that investors focus, instead of short-term profits, on the long-term effects of their investments for society. A mean by which this is done, is by facilitating the performance of shareholder rights, which must enhance the interaction between company and shareholders (ibid.: 5). This case can be viewed as an extreme case because Follow This focuses only on Shell and is, therefore, increasingly involved with Shell. However, a problem of an extreme case is that the representativeness of the case is weak, compared to other cases (Gerring, 2007: 104). As a result of that, it is not the objective to generalize the finding of this thesis to

(23)

22 a broader level. Nonetheless, it gives an insight that can be used for further theorizing on language in shareholder engagement, and it gives a better understanding of how shareholders can influence corporate behavior. This means that the unit of analysis will be shareholders of Shell. However, this unit analysis is part of a larger population, namely shareholders of private oil companies. The observations of this research will focus on two aspects. It will focus on description of what kind of argumentation is employed by shareholders and the company.

3.2 Methods, data gathering and data analysis

Different methods were applied in order to gather data for this thesis. To investigate the first two sub-research question, ‘which activities are employed by Follow This?’ and ‘how does Follow This frame the issue in their activities?’, this study started with a qualitative content analysis of six documents and one movie clip. This data covers the period from 2015 to 2018. This period is chosen because Follow This is founded in 2015. The five documents were available on the internet. The other document was received after mail correspondence with the founder of Follow This. The media clip was chosen, because in this clip the founder of Follow This could express the argumentation of Follow This in his own words. The documents of Follow This consist of three filled resolutions; a written speech; articles of association; and an investor briefing on their resolution, which is available on request. The qualitative content analysis allowed me to underline which arguments were made by Follow This.

Nevertheless, the qualitative content analysis was complemented by three participant observations, namely a visited conference on April the 5th _{that was organized by Follow This,}

an attend meeting on April the 24th_,_{and the AGM of Shell on May the 22}nd_{. These}

observations allowed the author to describe the concrete details about the action and talk of the actors involved in the case (Emerson et al., 1995: 32). Of these participant observations, fieldnotes were written down and were later elaborated to stories. The conference of April the 5th_{was actually recorded. These stories were eventually analyzed on their content. The}

qualitative content analysis is not only complemented with participant observations, but also with two interviews, who were conducted with those involved in Follow This. One interview was held with an employee of Follow This (P1) and the other interview with founder of Follow This (P2).

Thereupon, the research continued by investigating the second sub-research question ‘how do fellow investors react on the activities of Follow this?’. This was also done by a

(24)

23 qualitative content analysis of nine documents. All of the documents were available online and cover the period from 2017 until 2018. This data consists of one published letter to the management of Shell; one published asked question to the board of Shell; five published endorsement statements of institutional investors or investors interest groups; and one voting policy of an asset management company. This qualitative content analysis was complemented by one observation, namely the AGM on May the 22nd_{had been employed to observe the}

actions of the fellow investors. Of this observation fieldnotes were written down and worked out to one story, which was analyzed afterwards. In addition, these methods were

accompanied by four interviews. Two interviews were held with sustainability experts of investors’ interest groups (P4 & P6). The other interviews were held with an ESG analyst of a Dutch asset management company (P3) and the head of responsible investment of a pension fund (P5). An overview of the respondents can be found in Appendix I.

Finally, the last sub-research question, ‘how does Shell react on the rhetoric and activities of Follow This?’, was also analyzed through a qualitative content analysis. For this part five documents and one media item were used. The chosen media item, is a speech of the CEO during a conference in which he explained the reason for their recently announced climate ambition. The five selected documents are: one energy transition report; two speeches of the CEO of Shell; and two AGM reports in which the directors responded to the filled resolutions of Follow This. The energy transition report was received during the AGM of May the 22nd_{but is also available online on the website of Shell. The other documents were}

acquired via the website of Shell. This qualitative content analysis is accompanied by two observations. The first observation was done on April the 5th_{at the organized conference of}

Follow This. At this conference the CEO of Shell Netherlands was present. The second observation was done on May the 22nd_{during the AGM. Unfortunately, no interviews were}

conducted with Shell because the invitations for an interview were rejected.

The interviews were held from mid-April until the beginning of June. The interviews were conducted in a semi-structured fashion. This means that a couple of general questions were prepared in advance to function as a guideline. However, the respondent still had the ability to speak freely in their own words. This resulted in respondents often switching between subjects without being guided through specific questions. Five interviews were conducted face-to-face and one interview was conducted through the phone. All interviews were recorded and subsequently transcribed by the author. These interviews were conducted in Dutch and the author translated all the used quotations.

(25)

24 program that helps to categorize and identify themes in the data. The data was first coded open, resulting in relevant quotes were being divided in a broad range of categories. Therefore, a second analysis was conducted, in which the most relevant statements were reconsidered and categorized in six themes, which were derived from the following six formulated questions:

1. How is the problem defined?

2. What is the proposed solution for this problem? 3. What is the motive to come in action?

4. Why is the proposed problem questionable? 5. Why is the proposed solution questionable? 6. How is the reason for action rebutted?

In this way, it was possible to redistribute the statements and identify the relevant quotes.

3.3 Validity and Reliability

Although this study attempts to achieve valid as well as reliable results through using different methods that complement each other, it has its limitations concerning validity and reliability. A problematic feature of qualitative research is that it can leave too much space for the researchers own interpretations (Diefenbach, 2009). After all, it remains a personal

interpretation to understand a sentence of word in a particular manner. Moreover, the interpretation from the researcher might be different from what actually is meant by a

document or respondent. Nevertheless, this still might weaken the study’s reliability, which is ‘concerned with the question whether the results of the study are repeatable’ (Bryman, 2012: 46). Furthermore, it might decrease the validity of the study, which is ‘concerned with the integrity of the conclusions that are generated’ (ibid.) from the research.

The research has searched for means to achieve reliable and valid results in different manners. One way to overcome the issue of the own interpretation that derives from

observations or documents, is to determine via interviews if an observation is misunderstood. In this way, the reliability of the research is increased. Another solution to increase the reliability, is through sending the transcripts of the interviews to check if their words were written down correctly. Similar, concerns arise with regard to interviewing. It is possible that respondents were not willing to tell the full story honestly, because of fear of reputational damage. To overcome this issue, the documents that are used in this research serve as an extra check on the correctness of their story. Thus, through a process of triangulation, which relates

(26)

25 to ‘using more than one method or source of data in the study of a social phenomenon’

(Bryman, 2012: 390), is an attempt to increase the credibility of this research.

Finally, semi-structured interviews were chosen as a method for data gathering as a concession. One the one hand, structured interviews are more reliable but less valid. On the other hand, open interviews are more valid but less reliable. Through conducting a semi-structured interview, a concession was done, namely prepared questions allowed to ask questions in a more structured way. This increases the transparency and replicability of the research. Yet, it leaves space for respondents’ own input, which leads to more valid answers. Three different lists were adapted for the interviews. First, for Follow This the topics were focused more on their activities, motivation and reasoning. The interviews that were

conducted with respondents three and four, focused on their own engagement practices and motivations and reasoning to support the agenda of Follow This. This was done because they publicly announced to vote in favor of the resolution. In the end, the interviews with

respondent five and six concentrated more on what they view as responsible investment and how they engage with corporations. This was done, because it was unclear if they were favorable of the activities of Follow This. However, this means that repetition of this study would possibly result in different interviews. Nonetheless, the most critical topics were identified in the research.

(27)

26

4. What is Follow This?

Although shareholder engagements with multinational corporations is done by numerous institutional investors, Follow This is in some way distinctive from those investors. Therefore, before the results will be discussed, a brief background chapter on Follow This is necessary. This specifies the contextual image of Follow This and secure that the results are understood in this context. This chapter will discuss, why Follow This is founded and what their overall objective is. In this section also, the organizational features will be discussed.

Follow This is a shareholder association that is founded by Mark van Baal in 2015. The reason of this foundation was observed at a conference on April the fifth 2018 in ‘Pakhuis de Zwijger’ in Amsterdam. During this conference, Mark van Baal gave an explanation why Follow This was founded. He argued that Shell does not listen to journalists or governments, but only listens to its shareholders. According to him, shareholders are the only one who can influence Shell. Due to this assumption, Follow This was founded.

On their LinkedIn page, Follow This describes itself as ‘a group of green

shareholders’, who ‘support Shell to take the leadership in the energy transition to a net-zero-emission system’.1_{Through their website, it is possible to buy one share of Shell for the}

current market price plus five euros administrative costs. After the purchase of a share, it is possible to send an email to the chief executive officer (CEO) Ben van Beurden with the following message:

‘Hi Ben, I believe you can change the world. As a shareholder, I want to let you know that I expect a new approach from Shell. I want that Shell reforms and switches towards

sustainable energy. You can make a difference. Therefore, I became a shareholder. You have my support’.2

At the moment, the organization represents 4.008 shareholders and has 660.009 shares of Shell in its portfolio. It was observed that their daily team consists of about five or six

employees. However, their website argues that their team is made up of twenty employees, of which most work on a voluntary basis.

In the articles of association, the objective of Follow This is formulated. According to their articles of association, the association has the objective ‘to move Shell towards a

sustainable energy company; can be moved to become a company that concentrates primarily

1_{Follow This | Change the world: buy Shell. available at linkdin.com:}

https://www.linkedin.com/company/follow-this/. (22/06/2018).

2_{Hoe stuur ik een e-mail naar Shell CEO Ben van Beurden?. available at: follow-this.org:}

https://follow-this.org/faq-items/hoe-stuur-ik-een-mail-naar-shell-ceo-ben-van-beurden/. (22/06/2018).

(28)

27 on supplying energy products and services that contributes to a sustainable development’ (Follow This, 2015). Nevertheless, it was discovered in the conducted interviews with Follow This, that basically the overall objective is that the oil industry commits itself to the Paris Climate Agreement. As one employee of Follow This stated: ‘our dream is of course that Shell sets real targets in line with Paris’ (interview P1, translated by author).

How Follow This want to achieve this objective is also formulated in their articles of association. According to their articles of association they want to accomplish this objective by:

a. ‘promoting that Shell transforms itself into a company that focuses on supplying of energy products and services that contributes to a sustainable development as well as to offer insights into the financial issues, and in particular with reference to investment issues’;

b. ‘examination of the investment issues and the developments on the financial market in to contain regularly summits’;

c. ‘investing the capital in Shell without profit-making, in accordance of the below brought together to determine rules of its members’;

d. ‘visiting the annual general meeting of Shell as well as exercising speaking respectively voting right as well as visiting corporations or institutions in the field of investment being’;

e. ‘undertaking of activities, which can be beneficial for the goal of the association’ (Follow This, 2015).

In other words, Follow This is founded because the founder believes that shareholders are the only one who can adjust effectively the behavior of a corporation. Furthermore, Follow This can be defined as a group of green responsible investors who support Shell to take leadership towards a net-zero emission system. This is also represented in their overall objective, which is that the oil industry, and in particular Shell, commits itself to the Paris Climate Agreement. Follow This attempts to accomplish its goal via different means. The specific means, which Follow This deploys to advocate their agenda, will be specified in the next chapter.

(29)

28

5. Activities of Follow This

As formulated in their article of association, different means are deployed to achieve the objective of Follow This objective. Therefore, in this chapter the question ‘Which activities are employed by Follow This?’ will be discussed. This chapter consist of two parts. The first part will focus on the shareholder rights that are used to accomplish their objective. It will be observed that various shareholder entitlements are deployed by Follow This, of which the most critical is the usage of shareholder resolution. In the second part, attention will be paid to other activities that are used by Follow This to achieve their objective. It will be discovered that Follow This makes use of the media and organize conferences in order to inform the public about their agenda. Ultimately, the examination of which means are deployed by Follow This, is viewed as a stepping stone for the analysis of which rhetoric is employed.

5.1 Deployed shareholder rights to achieve objective

In this subsection attention will be paid to shareholder rights that are utilized by Follow This. This section is made up of two parts. First, the filled shareholder resolutions of Follow This will be discussed. In this section attention will be paid to the requests Follow This made in their resolutions and how much support those resolutions got. Thereafter, other shareholder rights will be debated.

5.1.1 Deployed shareholder rights to achieve objective: Filling resolution3s

Follow This makes use of the different entitlements they have as a shareholder. Yet, the most critical employed right is filling shareholders resolution. A resolution is a proposal that is submitted by shareholders, in which they request specified action from the board. The resolution is put to a vote during the AGM. In the case of Follow This, it is required to achieve 75 percent of the votes before a resolution will be adopted. In addition, filling a resolution under English law is costly because it demands that the filler has five million euros in shares and is signed by 100 co-fillers.

Since its foundation, Follow This has filled three resolutions (Shell, 2016a; Shell, 2017a; Shell, 2018b). In the first resolution they requested: ‘Shell to continue to take the profits from its existing oil and gas fields (for as long they are there) and to invest these profits in renewable energy’ (Shell, 2016a: 10). This proposal did not receive much support. As illustrated in Table 3., the shareholder resolution only received 2.78 percent of the votes.

(30)

29

Table 3. Shell AGM 2016 voting results.

Resolution Votes For % Votes Against % Votes Total % of ISC voted Votes Withheld Shareholder resolution 114,074,036 2.78% 3,995,029,228 97.22% 4,109,103,264 51.23% 124,675,299

Data retrieved from Shell (2016b).

One year later the resolution was reformulated. This was done because of two reasons. First, as a result of the response they received from investors and Shell. Second, due to the signing of the Paris Climate Agreement. In 2017, Follow This proposed that Shell needs to ‘set and publish targets for reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that are aligned with the goal of the Paris Climate Agreement to limit global warming to well-below 2°C’ (Shell, 2017a: 6). They further requested that ‘the GHG emission reduction targets need to cover Shell’s operations as well as the usage of its product, they need to include medium-term (2030) and long-term (2050) deadlines, and they also need to be company-wide, quantitative and

reviewed regularly’ (ibid.). This resolution received significant more support compared to the filled resolution of 2016. As demonstrated in Table 4., it received 6.34 percent of the votes. From this table, it is also observed that more shareholders decided to withheld their vote.

Table 4. Shell AGM 2017 voting results.

Resolution Votes For % Votes Against % Votes Total % of ISC Voted Votes Withheld Shareholder resolution 266,569,040 6.34% 3,935,173,765 93.66% 4,201,742,805 51.10% 235,047,934

Data retrieved from Shell (2017b).

As a result of the increasement of support for the resolution, in November of 2017 Shell announced an ambition to reduce the Net Carbon Footprint of their products (Shell, 2018a: 51). This ambition is formulated in a special published energy transition report. In this report it is stated that the ambition does not only cover the emission of their own operations, but also those of their customers that uses Shells’ energy products. This ambition entails that Shell plans to reduce the Net Carbon Footprint from 83 grams of CO2 per megajoule, to around 43 grams of C02 per megajoule by 2050. In addition, Shell intents to reduce the Net Carbon Footprint by 2035 with 20 percent (ibid.: 52). With this ambition, Shell aims to reduce the Net

(31)

30 Carbon Footprint of their products in the same pace as they expect that the society will

progress towards Paris (ibid.).

Despite, the increasement of support for their agenda and announced ambitions of Shell, Follow This decided to fill again a resolution in 2018. This was done due to the response of Shell and some institutional investors. The proposal of Follow this remained largely the same as the previous one. The only difference was that the resolution requested that GHG emission reduction targets need to cover ‘GHG emissions from use of Shell’s refinery fuel and natural gas products and sold CO2 transfers’ (Shell, 2018b: 6). However, as is presented in Table 5., the percentage of votes in favor of the resolution decreased that year to 5.54 percent. Nevertheless, the votes that were withheld increased.

Table 5. Voting results AGM Shell 2018.

Resolution Votes For % Votes Against % Votes Total % of ISC Voted Votes Withheld Shareholder resolution 268,063,768 5.54% 4,567,121,334 94.46% 4,835,185,102 57.96% 404,376,930

Data retrieved from Shell (2018c).

As is demonstrated in Table 6., the total percentage of votes for and votes withheld increased every year. This could indicate that the overall support for the resolution has increased. As explained by an expert regarding sustainable and responsible investment withholding your vote is considered to be an informed decision. Mostly, this is viewed as a statement against the board because withholding your vote indicates that shareholder disagrees with the strategy of the management.

(32)

31

Table 6. Shareholder requests period 2016 and results including Votes Withheld.

Year Request: %Votes For % Votes Withheld % Votes For + Votes Withheld %Votes Against Votes Total including Votes Withheld

2016 Invests profits from oil and gas in renewable energy.

2.69% 2.94% 5.63% 94.37% 4,233,778,565

2017 Set and publish GHG emission reduction targets that are aligned with the Paris Climate Agreement. These targets need to cover Shell’s operations as well as usage of its energy products.

6.00% 5.30% 11.30% 88.70% 4,436,790,739

2018 Set and publish GHG emission reduction targets that are aligned with the Paris Climate Agreement. These targets need to cover Shell’s operations as well as refinery fuel and natural gas products and sold CO2 transfers.

5.12% 7.72% 12.84% 87.18% 5,239,562,032

Data retrieved from Shell (2016a; 2016b; 2017a; 2017b; 2018b; 2018c).

As is illustrated in Table 6., the shareholder resolutions were reformulated and gained more support since 2016. Although the resolutions seem to be an ineffective instrument in order to achieve their objective immediately, because they did not get the required 75 percent of the votes. Nevertheless, the influence of the resolution must not be underestimated. As one employee of Follow This namely stated the goal of the resolution is that other shareholders take a position. In this context, the resolution indicates that it can force shareholders to take a position towards the shareholder resolution, which can lead to more pressure for the board of Shell to adopt policy or plans that are viewed as sustainable.

(33)

32 5.1.2 Deployed shareholder rights to achieve objective: Asking questions and having

dialogues

Besides that, Follow This makes use of their entitlement as a shareholder to fill a resolution, they employ also other formal and informal shareholder rights. One of the rights that is utilized, is the right to speak and ask questions at the AGM. At the AGM, of May the 22nd_{, it}

was observed that several ‘green’ shareholders asked questions to the board of Shell. These questions varied from the ambition of Shell that they announced, to why they recommend to vote against the resolution.

Furthermore, it was viewed that Follow This employs its right to speak during the AGM. Before the voting results were presented, the founder of Follow This took the floor. In his speech he explained why the resolution is on the agenda, what Follow This demands, and he rebutted the arguments the directors of Shell gave to vote against the shareholder

resolution. This resulted in a dynamic discussion during the AGM, suggesting that there exists a fierce discussion within the company about in which direction the company needs to head with regard to climate change.

Furthermore, the informal shareholder right of having dialogues is also used by Follow This. These dialogues are conducted due to their shareholder resolution. Follow This has dialogues with Shell as well as with fellow investors. According to an employee of Follow This it has become easier over the years to talk with both of them. First, Follow This has dialogues with fellow investors in which they attempt to inform them. This is done with an investor briefing, in which the purpose of the resolution is explained, counter arguments are rebutted, and answers are given on questions. Second, they have dialogues with Shell. They have these conversations to look if both parties can ‘work things out together’

(interview P1, translated by the author). This indicates that initiating dialogues is an activity that is employed to discuss issues confidentially in order to work things out and to settle disagreements. In short, Follow This employs formal as well as informal shareholder

activities to accomplish their aim. Yet, the most influential activity is their shareholder right of filling a resolution. This forms also the trigger for the usage of the other shareholder entitlements.

5.2 Other activities

In this part, the other activities that are employed by Follow This, will be discussed. This section consists of two parts. In the first part, the activity of being present in the media will be discussed. In this section, it will also be addressed why they think being present in the media

(34)

33 is beneficial in order to accomplish their objective and what the goal is of being active in the media. In the second part, two other activities will be reviewed, namely organizing

conferences and establishing partnerships. In this section, it will also be addressed why these activities are undertaken.

5.2.1 Other activities: Being present in the media

Alongside the employed formal and informal shareholder rights, Follow This uses different kinds of media to advocate their agenda. The founder of Follow This, Mark van Baal, appears once in a while on the television or radio. For example, he once showed up in the popular Dutch TV talk show Pauw. Furthermore, Follow This makes usage of Dutch newspapers. They send letters to Dutch newspapers or react on announced policy or investments of Shell when they are asked about a comment.

In an interview with the founder of Follow This, he explained why they use the media.

‘We [Follow This] want that the media makes it straightforward what we do. Look, what we do is making it clear to pension funds and asset management companies that the oil industry has to commit itself to the Paris Climate Agreement. And the only way to achieve that is doing it publicly, otherwise it would stay invisible for the public’ (interview P2, translated by author).

Later in the interview, he clarified this statement by asserting that:

‘The case is that the public needs to be aware about what is happening and that is the only way to get the attention of the management. You know, there is a quote of Mark Wilson, the CEO of Aviva, who said: “We should complement the ones who behave good. However, we should name and shame the ones that behave bad”. And we must do that publicly, because that is the only way to get the attention of the public and the directors’ (interview P2, translated by the author).

That being present in the media can result in getting the attention of the management of companies on which Follow This concentrates, is made clear in the following example. Follow This orchestrated, together with 67 lecturers, a letter in the Dutch newspaper NRC

Handelsblad. In this letter, the lecturers called out to their pension fund ABP to give up its

resistance against stricter climate targets for Shell and to vote in favor of the resolution of Follow This (Van den Dobbelsteen et al., 2018). As one employee of Follow This admitted that, as a result of this letter, they now have conversations with the management of ABP. Thus, this suggests that the activity of being present in the media has the aim to publicly confront targeted actors in order to gain their attention.

(35)

34 5.2.2 Other activities: Organizing conferences and establishing partnerships

Another activity that is employed by Follow This, is the organization of conferences. Since its foundation, Follow This has organized various symposiums. For instance, in February this year, they organized a conference for British and foreign investors of Shell in collaboration with ShareAction. In this conference, the question ‘how investors can support oil majors to commit to Paris’ was discussed. In April another symposium was organized. During this symposium the question whether ‘the ambitions of Shell are in line with the Paris Climate Agreement’ was debated by different speakers, including the CEO of Shell Netherlands and the founder of Follow This.

While attending this conference, the author got the impression that these symposiums were organized to inform investors and ultimately convince them to vote in favor of their resolution. This impression got confirmed during an interview, in which an employee of Follow This clarified that the conference in London was organized to inform British and foreign investors on their resolution. They do so, with the aim to gain more support for their resolution.

Another activity, of which is believed that it is beneficial to achieve the objective of transforming Shell into a sustainable energy company, is establishing partnerships. For example, Follow This collaborates with ShareAction. This is a British NGO that promotes responsible investment by pension funds and asset management companies. This partnership is shaped by the fact that ShareAction is one of the co-fillers of the resolution. As mentioned earlier, ShareAction and Follow This organized a symposium together in February of this year. The purpose of this collaboration is, as an employee stated, to increase the network of Follow This in foreign countries, and especially in Great-Britain.

This collaboration happens, for instance, through a recommendation of ShareAction to vote in favor of the shareholders resolution. They gave this advice after an examination of Shell’s climate ambition. They advised to vote in favor because the resolution ‘recognizes that investors need to make sure that Shell undertakes measures that will be followed effectively across the sector and push real changes at other high-carbon companies’ (ShareAction, 2017: 5). They further declared that ‘the 2018 Follow This resolution will turn Shell’s ambition into specific targets with clear responsibilities and incentive structure, and make sure Shell’s absolute emissions decrease at a rate aligned with the need to reduce global temperature rise to well-below 2°C’ (ibid.). Thus, the activity of establishing partnerships is not only

undertaken to inform foreign investors on their resolution, but it is also an instrument that sets them in motion in order to gain more support from foreign investors.