BHP

InfluenceMap Score
D
Performance Band
53%
Organisation Score
44%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Materials
Head​quarters:
Melbourne, Australia
Brands and Associated Companies
BHP Transport and Logistics, South32
Wikipedia:

BHP is actively lobbying climate and energy policy with a mix of supportive and unsupportive positions. BHP has consistently advocated for both limiting global warming to 2°C and the UN Climate Agreement, with BHP’s CEO Andrew Mackenzie personally asking US President Trump to remain in the agreement in 2017. Although BHP was an opponent of the Australian carbon tax in 2014, in 2017-2018 BHP has supported a carbon price in Australia that addresses “competitiveness concerns and achieves lowest cost emission reductions” , with CEO Andrew Mackenzie advocating a carbon tax in February 2018. In 2017, BHP also backed an Australian energy intensity trading scheme. However, whilst supporting a 'technology neutral' approach to emission reductions, BHP has opposed renewable energy policy in Australia, advocating in 2017 for a repeal of state-based Australian renewables targets and not supporting post-2020 national renewables targets. BHP also appears to have conflicting positions on energy subsidies. Despite Andrew Mackenzie stating opposition to subsidies for either renewable energy or coal-fired energy in 2018, in 2017, BHP appears to have defended a number of fossil fuel subsidies in Australia, including the petroleum resources rent tax, the fuel tax credit and “baseload generation” financial incentives, which in practice would likely subsidize coal plants. BHP has publicly disclosed a review of its trade association memberships, which concluded there were material differences between its position on climate and World Coal Association's, resulting in BHP quitting the group in April 2018. However, whilst BHP also found material differences with highly oppositional lobby groups the US Chamber of Commerce and Minerals Council of Australia, it has elected to retain its memberships and directly engage these groups on their climate and energy policy positions.

QUESTIONS SOURCES Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Climate Science Transparency 2 1 NA 2 2 2 2 NA
Climate Science Stance 1 0 NA 2 1 0 0 NA
Need for Climate Regulation 1 NS 1 2 NS NS NS NA
UN Treaty Support 1 1 NS NS 1 1 2 NA
Transparency on Legislation 0 NA 1 NA NA NA NS NA
Carbon Tax 0 0 0 0 0 0 NS NA
Emissions Trading 0 NS 0 0 0 NS 1 NA
Energy Efficiency Standards NS NS 1 -1 NS NS NS NA
Renewable Energy Legislation NS NS NS -2 -1 -2 NS NA
Energy Policy and Mix 0 0 -1 -1 -1 0 -1 NA
GHG Emission Standards 2 0 NS 0 -1 0 NS NA
Disclosure on Relationships 0 NS 0 NA NA NA NS NA
Climate Lobbying Governance NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
56%
 
56%
 
69%
 
69%
 
35%
 
35%
 
41%
 
41%
 
45%
 
45%
 
16%
 
16%
 
47%
 
47%
 
33%
 
33%
 
42%
 
42%

How to Read our Relationship Score Map

In this section, we depict graphically the relationships the corporation has with trade associations, federations, advocacy groups and other third parties who may be acting on their behalf to influence climate change policy. Each of the columns above represents one relationship the corporation appears to have with such a third party. In these columns, the top, dark section represents the strength of the relationship the corporation has with the influencer. For example if a corporation's senior executive also held a key role in the trade association, we would deem this to be a strong relationship and it would be on the far left of the chart above, with the weaker ones to the right. Click on these grey shaded upper sections for details of these relationships. The middle section contains a link to the organization score details of the influencer concerned, so you can see the details of its climate change policy influence. Click on the middle sections for for details of the trade associations. The lower section contains the organization score of that influencer, the lower the more negatively it is influencing climate policy.