On May 29, Exxon Mobil held its 2024 corporate election. Before the election, the company sued two investors over their proposal to include a commitment in its proxy statement to accelerate the company’s reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. Sarah Haan argues that the election and the lawsuit shed more light on current upheavals in corporate democracy than they do on the success of the ESG movement.
Chevron and ExxonMobil claim their announced mergers with Hess and Pioneer take advantage of market efficiencies, but a closer look reveals an antiquated tax provision likely sweetening these dangerous deals. Antitrust authorities must carefully review the serious risks entailed in these proposed mergers. In parallel, the United States federal government needs to end large tax-free reorganizations—the most egregious way in which American taxpayers are subsidizing monopolistic practices, writes Niko Lusiani.
In new research, Michal Barzuza, Quinn Curtis, and David Webber create a framework explaining why CEOs have powerful incentives to promote ESG, why these incentives are distinct from those of shareholders, why they are powerful despite the lack of governance mechanisms, and why they are at times excessive or skewed.
Investment advisors on both sides of the aisle have coopted ESG for their own exploitative marketing tactics to increase their own assets under management...
Should investors and stakeholders who wish to influence companies to promote desirable social and environmental outcomes focus on actions like divestment and boycotts (exit),...
According to a theory that is gaining support among academics and practitioners, we should expect index fund managers to undertake the role of “climate...
Two years after the Business Roundtable redefined its statement of Purpose of a Corporation to include “a fundamental commitment to all of our stakeholders”...
Patent databases may be a smoke screen that hides the true issues, problems, and dynamics of innovation behind the illusion that innovation is booming—and...