Institutional investors increasingly claim to integrate environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles into their voting decisions, yet the degree to which these claims align with their actual proxy voting behavior remains unclear.

This project seeks to identify and quantify discrepancies between the stated sustainability intentions of the world’s largest asset managers, as articulated in their proxy voting guidelines, and their revealed preferences in real-world ESG-related voting outcomes. By applying natural language processing techniques to these publicly available policy documents, and employing quantitative methodologies from political science to their voting records, the study will illuminate patterns of congruence or contradiction between principles and practice.

Leveraging a unique, expert-validated dataset of sustainability-related votes, the research advances our understanding of the credibility and impact of asset managers’ stewardship claims.

Ultimately, the findings can help asset owners, regulators, and the broader public more accurately assess the authenticity of ESG commitments, foster greater transparency, and guide the evolution of industry norms toward more meaningful sustainability engagement.