Glencore International

InfluenceMap Score
E+
Performance Band
36%
Organisation Score
37%
Relationship Score
Modifications to InfluenceMap Scoring
Sector:
Materials
Head​quarters:
Baar, Switzerland
Brands and Associated Companies
globalCOAL, Xstrata
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Climate Lobbying Overview: Glencore appears broadly unsupportive of immediate action on climate change and continues to support a sustained role for coal in the energy mix. Glencore also retains membership to a network of trade associations which engage negatively on various strands of climate change policy.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: In 2020, Glencore has stated that the response to climate change should pursue “twin objectives” of limiting temperatures in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement and supporting the UN Sustainable Development Goals, stressing access to affordable energy. In 2020, Glencore also continues to communicate its position on climate action with conditions such as the need for a “least-cost" approach to GHG emissions reductions. This framing appears to be used by the company to support pathways that rely heavily on the successful scaling of technologies such as CCS rather than more immediate, regulatory efforts to cut GHG emissions.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Glencore does not appear to support ambitious Australian climate policy. In 2018, Glencore advocated for weakening the Safeguard Mechanism, a policy designed to limit increased GHG emissions from heavy emitters, pushing for greater flexibility in setting GHG baselines along with the use of offsets. In 2019, Glencore further stated support for the Mineral Council Australia’s position on the policy, which likewise advocated several measures to weaken the policy. Despite Glencore’s 2019 disclosures stating that it supports ‘carbon pricing policy’ in principle, in practice, the company has not supported carbon tax legislation in South Africa. In 2019, Glencore disclosed that it supported the Minerals Council of South Africa’s position which, in the lead up to the carbon tax bill’s approval in 2019, repeatedly called for further delays to its implementation, raising concerns that it was not accompanied by sufficient incentives, while also demanding relief be agreed for the mining sector.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Glencore promotes the role coal in the global energy mix, maintaining in its 2020 reporting that it will be required to meet energy demand in Asia, and promoting coal as “part of the energy solution” in a 2020 presentation at a conference on the Swiss Energy Strategy. In May 2020, Glencore advocated for the approval of the Valeria project in Queensland, a new thermal and metallurgical coal mine. In July 2020 Glencore Chief Operating Officer Ian Cribb commented to the press on the project, stating, “In Queensland, coal continues to be an important driver of the economy as a source of jobs, royalties, reliable energy and support for local businesses.” Ian Cribb is also a director at the Queensland Resources Council, which ran a political advertising campaign in the run-up to the Queensland Election in October 2020 to encourage political support for the coal industry, while also heavily criticising Queensland’s Green Party.

Industry Association Governance: Glencore retains strong links to several trade associations actively opposed to meaningful climate change policy, including as a director on the board of the Queensland Resources Council, board-membership of the Minerals Council of Australia and The Minerals Council South Africa, and regular membership of the New South Wales Minerals Council. Glencore has published two industry association reviews, most recently in December 2020, but “found no serious misalignment” between its position and the positions of these industry associations.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
Main Web Site Social Media CDP Responses Legislative Consultations Media Reports CEO Messaging Financial Disclosures EU Register
Communication of Climate Science
2 2 NS NS NS NS NS NA
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
0 1 NA -1 -1 0 0 NA
Supporting the Need for Regulations
0 NS NS NS -1 0 NS NA
Support of UN Climate Process
0 1 NS NS -1 1 NS NA
Transparency on Legislation
0 NA -2 NA NA NA NS NA
Carbon Tax
-1 NS -1 NS -1 -2 NS NA
Emissions Trading
0 NS 0 NS NS NS NS NA
Energy and Resource Efficiency
NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NA
Renewable Energy
NS NS 0 NS -1 NS NS NA
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
-1 0 NS -2 -1 0 -2 NA
GHG Emission Regulation
NS NS NS -1 -1 NS NS NA
Disclosure on Relationships
1 NS -2 NA NA NA NS NA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
56%
 
56%
 
52%
 
52%
 
39%
 
39%
 
25%
 
25%
 
33%
 
33%
 
24%
 
24%
 
22%
 
22%
 
48%
 
48%
 
46%
 
46%
 
49%
 
49%
 
46%
 
46%

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.