Bayer

InfluenceMap Score
D-
Performance Band
46%
Organisation Score
42%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Healthcare
Head​quarters:
Leverkusen, Germany
Brands and Associated Companies
Bayer Pharmaceuticals , Bayer CropScience, Alka-Seltzer, Berocca
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Climate Lobbying Overview: Bayer appears to be broadly engaged in negative lobbying on climate change policy, although with limited engagement with key policies. Bayer has communicated more positive top-line positions on climate action and policy in recent years, but appears to have retained some negative positions on policy streams in Europe, emphasising concerns around costs and appearing sceptical of unilateral action in Europe. The company appears to have become less outwardly oppositional since 2015, with public engagement on these policy streams broadly reduced.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Bayer seems to be supportive of top line emissions reductions. The president of Bayer Crop Science, Liam Condon, signed a joint statement in 2020 advocating for a Green Deal in the recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and signalling support for climate neutrality by 2050 in Europe. In 2020 in an interview at Davos, the CEO of Bayer, Werner Baumann, appeared to state support for a regulatory framework to drive the implementation of technological solutions to climate change, but seemed to be unsupportive of unilateral action in Europe and also advocated for technologically agnostic policies.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Bayer appears to have limited interaction with specific policy streams. In 2020, a Mr Condon appeared to support a high price on carbon in a Finanzrichten article, but the company does not seem to have taken a position on emissions trading schemes in recent years. The board member also suggested in the article that Bayer does not oppose a CO2 tax on fuels in Germany. Bayer’s CEO, Mr. Baumann, stated in an interview at Davos 2020 that a carbon border adjustment mechanism is not supported by the company as it is “the opposite from what we are needing in a multilateral world”. The news organization Finanzrichten in 2020 reported that Bayer supports the EU’s increased Climate Target of 55% emissions reductions by 2030.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Bayer appears to support the energy transition. In the company’s CDP’s 2020 disclosure, it advocated for a decrease in fossil fuel energy production and an increased share of renewable energy sources in the energy mix. However, in 2019 on the corporate website the company appeared to stress concerns around the costs of the energy transition, as well as the impacts on competitiveness and the security of the energy supply.

Industry Association Governance: Bayer has not publicly disclosed a comprehensive list of the industry associations of which it is a member, only disclosing a limited number of industry associations in its 2019 Sustainability Report. This disclosure does not describe the positions of the associations in relation to climate policy, nor how the company is attempting to influence these positions. The company has not published a review of potential misalignment on climate policy with trade associations of which it is a member. Bayer holds membership to several organizations which are lobbying negatively on climate change such as the National Association of Manufacturers and BusinessEurope, and has influential positions on the board in associations such as the Verband der Chemischen Industrie and the American Chemistry Council.

However, the company maintains a number of strong relationships with trade associations actively lobbying against ambitious climate policy. In Europe, Bayer's CEO is a vice president of the VCI and the company is a member of CEFIC and is on BusinessEurope’s corporate advisory group. In the US, a Bayer senior executive holds a position on the US Chamber of Commerce’s board of directors, likewise a Bayer senior executive is also on the board of The American Chemistry Council.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Communication of Climate Science
1 1 NA NS -2 1 NS NA
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
1 1 NA 2 2 0 NS NA
Supporting the Need for Regulations
0 0 NS -1 NS 0 NS NA
Support of UN Climate Process
1 NS NS NS NS 1 NS NA
Transparency on Legislation
0 NA -2 NA NA NA NS NA
Carbon Tax
NS -1 NS NS 1 -1 NS NA
Emissions Trading
NS -1 2 NS 1 1 NS NA
Energy and Resource Efficiency
NS 0 1 -2 -1 NS NS NA
Renewable Energy
NS -1 1 -2 -2 -1 NS NA
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
0 0 1 NS 0 -1 NS NA
GHG Emission Regulation
1 -1 2 -1 2 -2 NS NA
Disclosure on Relationships
-1 NS 1 NA NA NA NS NA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
23%
 
23%
 
39%
 
39%
 
72%
 
72%
 
47%
 
47%
 
39%
 
39%
 
48%
 
48%
 
51%
 
51%
 
23%
 
23%
 
47%
 
47%
 
44%
 
44%
 
37%
 
37%
 
46%
 
46%
 
11%
 
11%

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.