2026 Proxy Season Global Trends Part 4: Shareholder Proposals, Activism and Sustainability

‍In the fourth instalment of our 2026 Proxy Season Global Trends, we provide a rundown of key takeaways relating to shareholder proposals, activism and sustainability issues from around the globe. Glass Lewis clients can access the full 2026 Proxy Season Global Briefing, which also covers shareholder rights and governance, executive pay and board composition, via the content libraries on Viewpoint and Governance Hub.

Trends on Shareholder Proposals and Activism

United States

The number of shareholder proposals going to a vote at U.S. companies declined moderately in 2026, while the number of majority-supported shareholder proposals decreased substantially.

• Compared to 2025, the number of shareholder proposals that went to a vote at U.S. companies declined by 12.3% in 2026.
• The number of majority-supported proposals declined by 42.9% in 2026 to 28, compared to 49 last year.
• Despite changes in the number and types of shareholder proposals going to a vote in 2026, average shareholder support for shareholder resolutions remained nearly identical to 2025, at 23.6%.

The proportion of governance proposals surged, while E&S proposals continued to decline.

• Although fewer shareholder proposals went to a vote overall, the number of governance-related proposals increased considerably in 2026 by 29.7%. Notable topics included 71 resolutions requesting an independent chair or the separation of the CEO and chair positions; 48 resolutions requesting the right to call a special meeting; and 37 resolutions requesting the right to act by written consent.
• The number of environmental and social (E&S) proposals declined by 31.3% year-on-year (from 211 to 145), and none received majority support (compared to five in 2025). Topics were largely consistent with last year, with an emphasis on human capital management (20), political spending (17), climate reporting (14), technology (13), human rights (12), climate targets (11) and charitable contributions (10). However, last year also saw 9 resolutions requesting a racial equity audit, while there were none in 2026.

AI proposals gained more prominence this year, after first appearing in the 2024 proxy season.

• In 2026, 11 shareholder resolutions were reviewed, covering a wide range of artificial intelligence (AI) related topics, such as the risks of AI data sourcing; climate commitments and AI data centers; model bias; responsible AI; misinformation and disinformation; as well as workforce impacts from AI and automation adoption.
• 10 of these resolutions were focused on U.S. companies, while one was focused on a Canadian company (Shopify). Average support was 8.9%, with no proposals receiving majority support. The highest level of support was 18.4% for a proposal at Amazon.com regarding its climate commitments amid growing energy demand from AI and data centers, down slightly from 20.1% in 2025 when it was first submitted at the company.

Asia

Shareholder proposals remain a key channel for shareholder activism throughout Asia.

• In Korea, the number of companies receiving shareholder proposals rose by 25%, driven by a spike in the number of investor-led campaigns (increased from 3 in 2025 to 11 in 2026).
• The total number of shareholder proposals increased by 9.8%. Governance-related proposals, including board composition, accounted for the majority.
• In Hong Kong, we reviewed four shareholder proposals across three companies, covering capital allocation, valuation enhancement and governance amendments.
• In India, we reviewed nine shareholder proposals across two companies, all covering board composition.
• In Japan, the number of shareholder proposals decreased from 411 to 377 year-on-year, while average shareholder support rose slightly from 13.0% to 13.5%.

UK

U.S. activist Saba’s series of campaigns continued, with successful results at several UK ITs, prompting potential Listing Rules changes in response.

• The boards of Edinburgh Worldwide Investment Trust and Impax Environmental Markets were successfully ousted; meanwhile, an agreement was reached with Herald Investment Trust and Schroder UK Mid Cap Fund, resulting in a Saba-supported cash exit via a tender offer.
• Launched in late 2024, Saba’s campaigns have involved repeatedly calling contested meetings seeking to change board composition to facilitate its own goals, and force structural change to the target companies.
• In June 2026, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) launched a consultation on changes to the UK Listing Rules for closed-ended investment funds. The proposed changes seek to ensure better protection of independent shareholders' interests, targeting the classification of director nominees proposed by investment managers, their participation in board decision-making, and the ability for managers with a significant stake to vote on material changes to investment policies. If implemented, the changes would impede any further action by Saba against investment trusts (IT).
• Most recently, Saba contested the AGM of Workspace Group plc, an internally-managed real estate investment trust, putting forward its own board nominees. This marks a departure from its prior focus on externally-managed ITs.
  
  • Saba’s proposals at Workspace Group were all defeated, although one nominee received support from over 40% of voting shareholders.

Trends on Sustainability

Sustainability reporting requirements are being scaled back around the globe.

• EU approval of the First Omnibus Package Content Directive will result in the scaling back of pending Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) requirements for most EU small cap companies.
  
  • The impact has already been felt, with sustainability reporting requirements dropped for small cap companies that were originally expected to produce their first disclosures in 2026.
  • Some small companies have also amended their articles to remove the requirement of appointing a sustainability auditor.
• On May 29, 2026, Brazil’s Securities and Exchange Commission (CVM) revoked a planned mandatory sustainability reporting requirement. Instead, CVM introduced a “comply or explain” approach, allowing companies to decide whether to report on sustainability or, if opting out, to explain their decision.
• Also on May 29, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) proposed rescinding certain climate-related disclosure rules, stating that they exceed the scope of the agency’s statutory authority. The SEC cited, “compelling policy reasons to rescind them entirely,” including that the rules are unnecessary and stray beyond federal securities laws’ policy concerns; conflict with the SEC’s policy objectives; impose unjustified and substantial costs on public companies and shareholders; and are not registrant specific or materiality based.
• In October 2025, New Zealand proposed to narrow the applicability of its climate-related financial disclosure requirements, raising the market cap reporting threshold from NZ$60 million to NZ$1 billion, and exempting managed investment scheme managers. The bill remains before Parliament.
  
  • The proposed amendments would also soften liability: directors will not be deemed liable for entity-level breaches, and reporting entities and their directors will not be liable for unsubstantiated forward-looking statements where they comply with the climate standards.

Despite diluted requirements, sustainability reporting continues taking root in Europe.

• Among EU large cap companies, sustainability reporting remained comprehensive in terms of external assurance and disclosure of Scope 1 and 2 emissions, consistent with what we observed in 2025.
  
  • Only two European large caps, Eurofins Scientific SE and EQT AB, removed their disclosure on Scope 3 emissions in 2026.
• No qualified opinion on sustainability reporting was issued for blue chip companies. Emphases of matter¹ were more frequent in some markets (e.g., France) than others, but as in 2025, most were uncontroversial and related to lack of comparable information for previous fiscal years.
• In the EU, there were 33% fewer proposals to appoint sustainability auditors compared to 2025.
  
  • This may reflect the use of multi-year term lengths, which vary from one to six years depending on country-specific implementation of the EU’s CSRD.
• A new requirement for EU large cap companies to comply with European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) disclosure, which partially differs from the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) standards, led to a 38% year-on-year drop in GRI-indicated reports.
  
  • Despite the shift, companies continue to informally adhere to GRI standards.

The prevalence of Say on Climate proposals continues to decline, with most votes once again taking place at European companies.

• 15 companies held Say on Climate votes, down from 19 last year and from a peak of 41 proposals in 2022.
• All had held a prior Say on Climate (10 in 2025, 3 in 2023, and 2 in 2022).
• The only non-UK or European companies to hold these proposals were Canadian: Canadian National Railway and Canadian Pacific Kansas City.
• Shareholder support declined to 88.8% in 2026 (compared to 95% in 2025, and 89% in both 2024 and 2023).