In a memo analyzing more than 15,000 companies worldwide, including historical proxy voting reports, analysts including Yannick Waknin found that more than two-thirds of these resolutions dealt with corporate governance issues.

However, the growth in the number of such resolutions was slower compared to proposals for corporate environmental or social changes, analysts noted.

Resolutions on social issues have doubled in the last five years and currently account for 15% of the total, their study showed.

There has also been a significant increase in environmental resolutions, the number of which tripled from 2020 to 2024. However, the share of these resolutions in the environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) categories "remains small," rising from 6% in 2020 to just 12% by the end of October, analysts said.

Meanwhile, boards of directors tend to be much less willing to vote in favor of shareholder resolutions, instead supporting management's plans and opposing investors. Analysts noted that until October 25, the support of the boards of directors was 31% for shareholder proposals and 95% for proposals from management.

In addition, among shareholder resolutions, boards of directors mostly recommended management proposals – usually dealing with issues at the director level and changes in capital structure – and rarely supported environmental or social changes, analysts said.

It is noteworthy that the boards of directors of 30 leading companies in the American S&P 500 index, the pan-European Stoxx 600 and the Asian MSCI APAC did not support or approve any shareholder resolutions presented at the annual general meetings this year, the analyst said.

Among the resolutions, the shareholders of Google's parent company Alphabet, Microsoft and Amazon raised issues related to the use of artificial intelligence.

"Listing shareholder resolutions among the top 30 companies in the S&P 500, [the] most important issue affecting many sectors was artificial intelligence, and especially AI oversight," Bernstein analysts said. "This was followed by social issues related to people, such as discrimination; diversity, equality and inclusivity; child safety and human rights. The next big issue was the impact on the climate."

Against this background, analysts argued that the next phase of ESG investment is likely to increasingly depend on the quality of corporate dialogue.

"An interaction that anticipates rather than reacts to contradictions will determine top-level performers. Over time, the transparency of the results of the interaction – quantified using metrics and superimposed on the financial impact – will become part of the main evaluation structures," the analysts said.