Dow Chemical

InfluenceMap Score
D-
Performance Band
51%
Organisation Score
34%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Chemicals
Head​quarters:
Midland, United States
Brands and Associated Companies
Dow AgroSciences, Union Carbide, Rohm and Haas, ANGUS Chemical Company
Official Web Site:

Dow appears a mixture of positions on climate change regulation, however, retains a significant number of relationships to trade associations actively opposing a progressive climate policy agenda. In 2017, then Chairman and CEO Andrew Liveris stated that the threat posed by climate change was real, and responding was consistent with a pro-business agenda. However, in other public comments, Dow has stressed that emissions reductions be tackled at the global level, citing the threat of carbon leakage otherwise. The company reiterated this in February 2018, again calling for emission reductions targets to be “realistically set” on the basis that “no economy can afford to compromise growth”. In practice, Dow has made several positive top-line statements on climate policy but has remained less supportive of others. For example, in the U.S., as a member of the CEO Climate Dialogue Dow stated support for economy-wide emissions reductions of 80% by 2050, though without reference to a specific baseline. The company was also a signatory to a joint letter in July 2018 which stated support for a legislative market-based price on carbon. However, in 2018 Dow spokesperson criticized the EU and national governments for seeking to increase the price of emissions certificates under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. In Australia, Dow urged all stakeholders in 2018 to support the National Energy Guarantee, however, former CEO Andre Liveris also disparaged moratoriums on hydraulic fracturing in a number of Australian states as “voodooism”. Dow is a key member of several trade associations with an overwhelming negative engagement on climate change regulation, including the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the US Chamber of Commerce,, the American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the European Chemical Industry Council (CEFIC).

QUESTIONS SOURCES Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Climate Science Transparency 1 2 NS 2 2 2 NS NA
Climate Science Stance 0 1 NA -1 NS NS NS NA
Need for Climate Regulation NS 1 NS NS 2 -1 NS NA
UN Treaty Support 1 2 NS -1 1 1 NS NA
Transparency on Legislation 0 NA 0 NA NA NA NS NA
Carbon Tax NS 1 NS NS NS NS NS NA
Emissions Trading -1 -1 0 -1 -1 NS NS NA
Energy Efficiency Standards 1 0 0 -1 2 NS NS NA
Renewable Energy Legislation 0 -1 0 -2 0 -1 NS NA
Energy Policy and Mix 0 0 0 -2 0 0 -1 NA
GHG Emission Standards 0 1 0 -1 0 NS NS NA
Disclosure on Relationships -1 NS -1 NA NA NA NS NA
Climate Lobbying Governance NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
22%
 
22%
 
41%
 
41%
 
21%
 
21%
 
39%
 
39%
 
47%
 
47%
 
37%
 
37%
 
17%
 
17%
 
45%
 
45%
 
22%
 
22%

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.