One group of shareholders, led by the advocacy group ACCR, filed a resolution in January calling on BP to prove that the shift back towards hydrocarbons will deliver value.[1] It is reported the co-filers of the resolution represent 0.42% of BP’s share capital, a value worth around GBP338mn at current market levels. This resolution will have a vote at the AGM, although BP’s chair has recommended that shareholders reject it.[2]
A second group of shareholders, coordinated by NGO Follow This, filed a resolution (also to Shell) in January requesting transparency on the strategies to create value under scenarios of declining oil and gas demand, including those published by the International Energy Agency.[3] The total shareholders that supported the resolution was not disclosed. This resolution has not been included on the Agenda for BP’s AGM, and this has been resulted in the threat of legal action.[4],[5]
In 2025 a group of institutional investors that controlled 2.5% of BP’s shares called on the company to give shareholders a vote on its plans to row back on climate goals.[6]
What seems clear is that these shareholder resolution-oriented engagements, while high profile, do not seem yet to have been effective in behaviour change for BP. Both are requesting only additional disclosure, not even a change in strategy, and have not yet succeeded. Is there another option for investors seeking a response to their stewardship objectives, to complement these activities?
The long term financial risks from a failed transition sit with debt investors.[7] While BP has not extended maturity of its bonds quite as substantially as peers,[8] it does have three bonds with maturity past 2050 of total outstanding notional USD5.55bn, plus over USD13.5bn equivalent in perpetual securities. A clear transition strategy is needed for these investors to be comfortable with such a long credit exposure.
The AFII bondholder engagement toolkit offers options for how fixed income investors can further their engagement objectives.[9] In this case, we suggest investors call a meeting. A contractual right, that is often not known about, is that bondholders controlling just 10% of a single security have the right to convene a meeting, where investors will have the ability to put their requests directly to BP.
Considering the 4.375% EUR perpetual bond (ISIN XS2940455897) with notional EUR750mn,[10] this would mean only investors totalling GBP64mn are needed, substantially less than have signed up for the ACCR shareholder resolution.
BP has over USD7bn equivalent of bonds maturing in the next two years, and so ongoing relationships with its bondholders are essential for its funding requirements. Bondholders have a power to communicate with this oil giant, and request the disclosure of its long term profitability which the shareholders alone have not yet succeeded in uncovering.
**********************************************************************************************************************************
[1] "Activist shareholder ACCR, pension funds urge BP to show shift to oil and gas will deliver value", Reuters, 3 Feb 2026.
[2] "Letter from the chair", BP, 6 Mar 2026.
[3] The resolution was filed before the recent conflict in Iran, which has driven up oil prices.
[4] "Follow This threatens BP with legal action over shareholder proposal exclusion", Responsible Investor, 11 Mar 2026.
[5] "Green investors threaten BP with legal action over rejected resolution", Financial Times, 11 Mar 2026.
[6] "BP investors call for vote on any rowback on climate goals", Financial Times, 19 Feb 2025.
[7] "BP’s bondholder divestment risk with oil & gas output increase", AFII, 25 Feb 2025.
[8] "Total eclipse of the 2050 net zero deadline", AFII, 13 Jan 2025.
[9] "Finding your voice: tools for better bondholder engagement on climate and nature risk", AFII, 5 Dec 2025.
[10] Screenshot is pg 50 of Bond Prospectus.
