Target 9.1: Quality, resilient infrastructure
Develop quality, reliable, sustainable and resilient infrastructure, including regional and transborder infrastructure, to support economic development and human well-being, with a focus on affordable and equitable access for all
Owners voting their values help. Others must carry most of it.
Why shareholder democracy is helpful
The Global Infrastructure Hub projects a USD 15 trillion gap between projected and needed infrastructure investment by 2040. Most of that infrastructure is procured, financed or regulated by governments, with private capital blended in under the Addis Ababa framework. Listed construction, engineering, utility and infrastructure-fund companies help at the margin through project quality and resilience standards. Private infrastructure investment in low and middle income countries is only about a quarter of the global private total. We found no documented shareholder resolution on general infrastructure provision. Owners help at the margin and are not on the critical path.
How this was scoredHelpful
Helpful. Owners voting their values help. Others must carry most of it.
We have not yet written down the two answers behind this rating. Recording them on every item, so a reader can check the reasoning and not only the conclusion, is work in progress.
Every rating is the higher of two answers, one for what companies do and one for what they spend to stop the outcome, because the same vote reaches both. See the full method.
Sources
No shareholder advocacy found yet
We looked and found nothing that met our standard, which is a source we opened and confirmed. No shareholder advocacy located on general infrastructure provision, quality or resilience. The As You Sow resolutions tracker at https://www.asyousow.org/resolutions was fetched and confirmed to contain no resolutions on infrastructure, climate resilience, climate adaptation or infrastructure investment in developing countries; its climate filings concern transition plans (data centre operators), climate risk disclosure at an insurer, supply chain, packaging and labour topics. Searches returned government and multilateral grid and adaptation programmes (US Department of Energy grid modernization, OECD, Global Center on Adaptation, CDRI) rather than any ownership-based engagement. The two ICCR resolution pages tried returned a 404 and a navigation-only page, so neither could be confirmed either way. Note that this session's web search budget was exhausted partway through, limiting the number of query angles that could be tested.
How this rating was made
Every item on every one of our maps is read against one question: how far does this depend on the people who own companies voting their values? We answer it twice, once for what companies do and once for what they spend to stop the outcome, and take whichever answer is higher, since the same vote reaches both. The score carries its reasoning and its sources so that a reader can check it rather than take it.
- Pivotal. Owners voting their values can deliver most of the outcome.
- Necessary. Owners remove an obstacle nothing else removes, and others must also act.
- Helpful. Owners voting their values help, and others carry most of it.
- Independent. This moves without owners. Other levers carry it.
The advocacy record on this page holds only what a source we opened says happened. Where we searched and found nothing, the page says so rather than leaving a silence. Where a campaign names a filer the source does not name, it says that too. Ratings are ours; the list of subjects is UN Sustainable Development Goals's, and we link to their original.
How we score dependency, in full.