Business Roundtable
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.
Update August 2021: If limited evidence had been collected either on a company's direct policy engagement (Organization Score) or industry association links (Relationship Score) this is signified with an ‘n/a’ (not available). If limited evidence has been collected in both areas, the Total Score is also given as n/a. Full details and links back to any primary evidence that has been collected can still be located on the company’s profile.
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.
|
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? |
0
|
1
|
NA |
-1
|
NS | NS | NA |
|
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) |
0
|
1
|
NA |
-1
|
-1
|
-2
|
NA |
|
Supporting the Need for Regulations
To what extent does the organization express the need for regulatory intervention to resolve the climate crisis? |
0
|
-1
|
NA | NS |
-2
|
1
|
NA |
|
Support of UN Climate Process
Is the organization supporting the UN FCCC process on climate change? |
NS |
2
|
NA | NS |
0
|
NS | NA |
|
Transparency on Legislation
Is the organisation transparent about its positions on climate change legislation/policy and its activities to influence it? |
0
|
NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
|
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
NS | NS | NA | NS | NS | NS | NA |
|
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
NS | NS | NA | NS | NS | NS | NA |
|
Energy and Resource Efficiency
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: energy efficiency policy, standards, and targets |
1
|
NS | NA | NS | NS | NS | NA |
|
Renewable Energy
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Renewable energy legislation, targets, subsidies, and other policy |
1
|
NS | NA | NS | NS | NS | NA |
|
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? |
-2
|
-1
|
NA |
0
|
0
|
NS | NA |
|
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 |
-2
|
-2
|
NA |
-2
|
-2
|
-2
|
NA |
|
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? |
2
|
NS | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA |
Climate Lobbying Overview: Business Roundtable appears to be engaging on climate policy with increasingly positive positions. While the group engaged with mostly negative positions from 2014-2017, it appears not to have taken an active stance on most climate legislation and regulation from 2018-2021. Its communications are largely limited to top-line positions on climate change.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Business Roundtable’s 2020 climate position statement (“Addressing Climate Change: Principles and Policies”) calls for global emissions reductions in line with IPCC recommendations and makes the case for carbon pricing as a pillar of its preferred approach. However, Business Roundtable qualifies its support for government policy with the need to maintain national competitiveness, and asserts that market-based action is "more often than not" preferable to regulation of emissions reductions. In January 2021, Business Roundtable issued a statement strongly supporting the Biden administration’s decision to rejoin the Paris Agreement. It did not appear to take a stance on the new US NDC of 50% emissions reductions by 2030 (based on 2005 levels) announced in April 2021.
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: In its 2020 climate policy position paper, Business Roundtable states support for a price on carbon but does not endorse specific carbon tax or cap and trade legislation/regulation and cautions against administrative burdens and implementation costs. The report also favors policy to encourage and incentivize energy efficiency in buildings, equipment, appliances, transportation, manufacturing, and the electricity sector. While Business Roundtable demonstrated support for the wind production tax credit in 2017, it has shown little engagement with specific renewable energy policy in recent years. Previously, in 2017, Business Roundtable wrote a letter to the White House on the negative economic impacts of environmental legislation, opposing the overreach of the US EPA and demanding an overhaul of the Clean Power Plan.
Positioning on the Energy Transition: Business Roundtable's 2020 climate statement notes that the energy transition is “likely to take decades” and will require a “diverse spectrum of fuels and energy sources” to meet global energy demand, a position that appears misaligned with IPCC recommendations to phase out unabated fossil fuels. And in 2015-17, Business Roundtable explicitly supported the Keystone XL pipeline and advocated for policy changes that would enable the expansion of oil and gas infrastructure. Speaking on behalf of the organization, President Joshua Bolten voiced opposition to the US Green New Deal in September 2020. The group has not commented on President Biden’s recent orders to transition the energy mix.