Moller Maersk (Maersk)
What do our scores mean?
The organizational score represents the degree to which the organization influencing climate policy and legislation. Corporations also have relationship scores reflecting their links with influencers like trade associations. Both are combined to place the corporation in a performance band. Full details can be found here.
Engagement Intensity
The engagement intensity (EI) is a metric of the extent to which the company is engaging on climate change policy matters, whether positively or negatively. It is a number from 0 (no engagement at all) to 100 (full engagement on all queries/data points). Clearly energy companies are more affected by climate regulations and will have a higher EI than, for example retailers. So an organization’s score should be looked at in conjunction with this metric to gauge the amount of evidence we are using in each case as a basis for scoring. On our scale, an EI of more than 35 indicates a relatively large amount of climate policy engagement.
Relationship Score, December 2020
A new batch of industry associations has been uploaded onto the InfluenceMap system and the relationship scores recalculated accordingly.
Updated terminology, February 2021
We adjusted the terminology used to describe the queries running down the left-hand side of our scoring matrix and added additional explanatory text to the info-boxes. This has no impact on the scores and methodology. It has been done following user feedback to improve clarity.
- Details of Organization Score
-
What do the 0,1,2 and NSs, NAs mean?
Each cell in the organization's matrix presents a chance for us to assess each data source against our column of climate change policy queries. We score from -2 to 2, with negative scores representing evidence of obstructive influence. "NA" means "not applicable" and "NS" means "not scored" - that is we did not find any evidence either way. In both cases, the cell's weighting is re-distributed over others. Red and blue cells represent highly interesting negative or positive influence respectively. Full details can be found here.
- Details of Relationship Score
-
What is the Relationship Score
A corporation, as well as its organizational score will have a relationship score. It is computed by aggregating the organizational scores of the Influencers (trade bodies etc.) it has relationships with, weighted by both the strength of these relationships and the relative importance of the Influencers towards climate change policy. Full details can be found here.
|
QUERIES
|
DATA SOURCES | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Main Web Site
The main organizational Web site of the company and its direct links to major affiliates and attached documents. |
Social Media
We search other media and sites funded or controlled by the organization, such as social media (Twitter, Facebook) and direct advertising campaigns of the organization. |
CDP Responses
We assess and score responses to two questions from CDP's climate change information request (12.3 a & 12.3c) related to political influence questions (currently these are not numerically scored by the CDP process). |
Legislative Consultations
Comments from the entity being scored on governmental regulatory consultation processes, including those obtained by InfluenceMap through Freedom of Information requests. |
Media Reports
Here we search in a consistent manner (the organization name and relevant query search terms) a set of web sites of representing reputable news or data aggregations. Supported by targeted searches of proprietary databases. |
CEO Messaging
Here we search in a consistent manner (the CEO/Chairman, organization name and relevant query search terms) a set of web sites of representing reputable news or data aggregations. Supported by targeted searches of proprietary databases. |
Financial Disclosures
We search 10-K and 20-F SEC filings where available, and non US equivalents where not. . |
|
|
Communication of Climate Science
Is the organization transparent and clear about its position on climate change science? |
1
|
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
Is the organization supporting the science-based response to climate change as set out by the IPCC? (the IPCC) |
2
|
2
|
NA | NS |
2
|
2
|
NS |
|
Supporting the Need for Regulations
To what extent does the organization express the need for regulatory intervention to resolve the climate crisis? |
1
|
1
|
NA |
-1
|
2
|
2
|
NS |
|
Support of UN Climate Process
Is the organization supporting the UN FCCC process on climate change? |
1
|
2
|
NS | NS |
2
|
2
|
NS |
|
Transparency on Legislation
Is the organisation transparent about its positions on climate change legislation/policy and its activities to influence it? |
0
|
NA |
-1
|
NA | NA | NA | NS |
|
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
0
|
2
|
1
|
NS |
2
|
NS | NS |
|
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
0
|
NS |
1
|
-2
|
-1
|
0
|
NS |
|
Energy and Resource Efficiency
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: energy efficiency policy, standards, and targets |
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Renewable Energy
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Renewable energy legislation, targets, subsidies, and other policy |
NS | NS | NS |
2
|
NS | NS | NS |
|
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
Is the organization supporting an IPCC-aligned transition of the economy away from carbon-emitting technologies, including supporting relevant policy and legislative measures to enable this transition? |
1
|
1
|
NS | NS |
1
|
2
|
NS |
|
GHG Emission Regulation
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: GHG emission standards and targets. Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Standards, targets, and other regulatory measures directly targeting Greenhouse Gas emissions |
NS |
2
|
2
|
NS |
2
|
NS | NS |
|
Disclosure on Relationships
Is the organization transparent about its involvement with industry associations that are influencing climate policy, including the extent to which it is aligned with these groups on climate? |
-1
|
NS |
1
|
NA | NA | NA | NS |
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Moller Maersk's Executive Vice President is on the board of the International Chamber of Shipping
Henriette H. Thygesen
Open PDF file of Data Source
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Moller Maersk's Chief Operations Officer is on the board of the International Chamber of Shipping
Søren Toft
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
A Senior Executive of Moller Maersk is a board member of the International Chamber of Shipping
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Moller Maersk's Executive Vice President is on the board of the International Chamber of Shipping
Henriette H. Thygesen
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Moller Maersk's Chief Operations Officer is on the board of the International Chamber of Shipping
Søren Toft
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
A Senior Executive of Moller Maersk is a board member of the International Chamber of Shipping
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Maersk CEO is a member of ERT
Soren Skou
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Maersk CEO is a member of ERT
Soren Skou
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Maersk CEO is a member of ERT
Soren Skou
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Maersk CEO is a member of ERT
Soren Skou
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Moller Maersk (Maersk) is an indirect member of GasNaturally, through its membership of International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Moller Maersk (Maersk) is an indirect member of GasNaturally, through its membership of International Association of Oil and Gas Producers (IOGP)
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.
Climate Lobbying Overview: Moller Maersk (Maersk) appears to have increasingly positive engagement with climate change regulation regarding shipping at a global level, with mixed engagement with EU-level climate policy in 2020-21. Maersk appears supportive of Paris-aligned climate action in its top-line messaging, and has generally advocated for an ambitious global climate strategy for shipping at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in 2019-21. However, it appears to oppose some stringent regional climate measures to regulate shipping, such as the full inclusion of international shipping in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS).
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Maersk has mostly positive top-line communications on climate change in 2019-21. In communications from 2021, Maersk stated support for a 1.5°C temperature goal, and its CEO, Søren Skou signed a joint letter calling for net zero global GHG emissions by 2050. In 2020, Maersk also advocated for more ambitious shipping climate regulation at a global level through the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in media comments. In April 2021, Maersk further appeared supportive of US calls for net-zero shipping emissions 2050 target at the IMO, with a Maersk spokesperson later stating at a webinar in May 2021 that the IMO’s ambition of 50% GHG reductions by 2050 “should be strengthened to aim for net-zero emissions in 2050”. However, while Maersk disclosed support for more ambitious global climate regulation for shipping in its 2020 Sustainability Report, a 2020 EU consultation response emphasizes concerns around EU climate regulations for shipping, prioritizing global climate regulation.
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Maersk appears to have mixed engagement with specific climate-related regulations. In the EU, a November 2020 consultation response from Maersk appeared to take an unclear position on including intra-EEA shipping journeys in the EU ETS while advocating for free emissions allowances based on historical performance and urging the EU “to not consider any measure going beyond intra-EEA scope”. Additionally, a CNN report from 2020 suggests Maersk was unsupportive of including shipping in the EU ETS. In 2021 Maersk’s head of regulatory affairs stated support for the initial inclusion of intra-EEA shipping journeys in the EU ETS in 2023-2025 until the introduction of a global shipping carbon levy, later in May 2021 appearing to suggest that the EU ETS could be expanded to all EEA shipping journeys by 2025 “should the IMO not have delivered”.
In a 2021 EU consultation response, Maersk further stated support for a higher overall 2030 renewable energy target, and a 14% 2030 EU renewable energy in transport target. In April 2021, Maersk, as part of the Transform to Net Zero initiative, also stated support for a 50% US GHG emissions reduction target for 2030.
Positioning on Energy Transition: Regarding the energy transition, Maersk in 2019-21 has consistently promoted the use of sustainable aviation fuels over LNG for shipping. In April 2021, Maersk’s CEO, Søren Skou, commented to the Wall Street Journal that “we don’t believe that LNG will play a big role as a transition fuel because it’s still a fossil fuel”, with another Maersk spokesperson in May 2021 arguing that “it is borderline greenwashing to call LNG a transition fuel towards the decarbonisation of shipping”. Similarly, other 2021 media reports suggest Maersk supports lower-carbon shipping fuels like green ammonia and green methanol over LNG. Maersk has previously expressed tentative support for a global fuel tax on shipping, with Maersk's former Chief of Operations Søren Toft suggesting in April 2019 that a carbon tax “could be an important mechanism” in the long run, with evidence from 2021 suggesting increased support. Moreover, in June 2021 Maersk announced support for a global carbon tax on shipping fuel starting at $50 in 2025 and ramping up to $150 in subsequent years. In June 2021, Maersk CEO, Søren Skou also signed a joint letter advocating to "eliminate fossil fuel subsidies" globally.
Industry Association Governance: Maersk discloses its membership of a limited number of industry associations in its 2020 sustainability report without providing further details on the companies role within the associations’ governing bodies or influence over their climate positions. However, Maersk discloses this information in more, but not full, detail to CDP. Maersk has not published a review of its alignment with its industry associations. Maersk appears to have improved its indirect engagement with climate policy since selling its subsidiary Maersk Oil to Total SA in 2018. It subsequently appears to no longer participate in trade associations including the International Organization of Gas and Petroleum (IOGP) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) which have strongly negative engagement on climate change regulation. However, the company is on the board of the International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) which - seemingly in contradiction to many of Maersk’s positions - has actively lobbied against Paris-aligned global climate change regulation for the shipping sector.