Investors Must Hold Ford Accountable for Its Climate Promises
By Carly Oboth
The future of the auto industry—and the planet—depends on what we build today.
Ford’s products are changing, but without action from shareholders, its commitment to sustainability may not. A critical proposal this proxy season asks Ford to explain how it will meet its 2022 commitment to source low-carbon steel, a move essential to cutting its massive supply chain emissions.
Steel is one of the most carbon-intensive materials in the world, responsible for roughly 7%–9% of global greenhouse gas emissions. Yet it remains a critical input for every major automaker, including those marketing themselves as leaders in the green transition. That contradiction presents both a risk and an opportunity, especially for investors focused on climate resilience and long-term value.
Investors have the leverage—and the responsibility—to ensure automakers walk the talk on climate. Supporting these proposals is a chance to push for real accountability, reduce exposure to long-term risks, and help catalyze a cleaner, more resilient industry.
Ford’s recent decisions to scale back its electric vehicle production goals send a troubling signal. As the company pulls away from its environmental commitments, it becomes even more critical that shareholders step in. Without strong investor action, Ford risks falling behind in the transition to a sustainable, low-carbon economy—and missing a vital opportunity to lead.
In 2022, Ford and General Motors joined the First Movers Coalition, publicly committing to source at least 10% low-carbon steel by 2030. But despite this pledge, neither company has disclosed a credible plan for how they will meet this goal. No roadmap, no milestones, no strategy.
This year, shareholders have filed proposals at both Ford and GM asking for basic transparency: a report on how the companies intend to fulfill their own commitment.
This is not an unreasonable request. Investors increasingly understand that climate risk is financial risk, and supply chains are where a significant portion of that risk lies. Without a clear plan to decarbonize steel supply chains, Ford and GM are exposed to rising regulatory, market, and reputational risks.
Consider the European Union’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which places a carbon price on imported steel, aluminum, and other goods with high carbon footprints, which could be expanded to include downstream products that use these materials. This policy is a sign of where global policy is heading. U.S. companies that fail to shift to low-carbon materials will face growing barriers in international markets—and will fall behind competitors who move faster.
Indeed, some already are. European automakers like Volvo, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz have announced partnerships to integrate green steel into their vehicles. Meanwhile, Ford and GM have not released timelines, procurement strategies, or supplier engagement frameworks to back up their own climate pledges.
The shareholder proposals do not ask Ford or GM to commit to a higher target. They simply request a disclosure: what is the plan for reaching the 10% low-carbon steel commitment they already made? Investors deserve to understand how these companies are managing one of the most emissions-intensive parts of their supply chains.
There’s also a strategic upside here. Decarbonizing steel isn’t just about managing risk—it’s about seizing market opportunity. Innovations in green hydrogen and cleaner steelmaking are gaining momentum. As two of the world’s largest auto-grade steel buyers, Ford and GM have enormous potential to shape the market for low-carbon materials and position themselves as leaders in climate-smart manufacturing.
The old ways of doing business—reliant on coal and carbon-heavy supply chains—leave lasting scars on communities and our climate. Ford made a promise to do better. It’s time for shareholders to make sure they deliver.