A comprehensive assessment of the world's 30 largest listed financial institutions shows a clear disconnect between the concrete short-term targets and actions needed to address the climate emergency and the limited, long-term targets currently being set by the financial sector. This research seeks to compare the sector's stated climate policies and commitments to its climate-relevant financing and policy lobbying activities.
This briefing analyzes the 20 largest, US-based companies with InfluenceMap Organization Scores over 65, indicating broadly positive positioning towards climate change policy. Despite their apparent support for climate action, the majority of these companies are not publicly endorsing the Build Back Better Act.
This research assesses 723 equity funds specifically marketed using ESG- and climate-related key words, with over US$330 billion in total net assets. It does so on the basis of two climate criteria (portfolio Paris Agreement alignment and fossil fuel intensity) likely to be of primary interest to investors in funds marketed in this manner.
Despite the CA100+ initiative having clear expectations on Paris-aligned lobbying, only 2 of the 31 CA100+ target companies found to be engaging on the taxonomy appear to be supportive of its science-based guidance with 4 companies advocating mixed or unclear positions, leaving more than 80% pushing the Commission to weaken the criteria that define what can be considered sustainable.
This report is being released in conjunction with InfluenceMap's revamped, interactive CA100+ platform which contains additional analysis covering the climate lobbying of CA100+ target companies.
In the final year of the Trump Administration, authorities finalized three rules which have the effect of limiting the opportunities for ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) investing.
Intensive lobbying throughout 2020 from real economy sectors has extracted significant concessions from the European Commission on its EU Sustainable Finance taxonomy.
The research finds that the only sector where the Fed is consistently overweight on all three indicators (debt outstanding, equity values and employment) is the GISC Energy sector which contains oil/gas and coal value chain companies exclusively.
This research finds this intervention represents support of parts of the economy which may have been in secular decline prior to the pandemic, most noteably the fossil fuel energy sector.
New analysis from InfluenceMap has tracked significant lobbying on the EU Ecolabel since late 2018, as part of a wider ongoing research process covering the EUs Sustainable Finance Action Plan and how the corporate sector is influencing the process.
A new briefing from UK based think tank InfluenceMap shows how the European Central Bank (ECB) has embarked on its Pandemic Emergency Purchase Programme (PEPP) bond buying progamme that has spent 50bn in the last three weeks.
The following briefing focuses on how Japanese industry associations lobbied the Taxonomy and considers how these lobbying positions contrast with those of some leading European financial institutions.
The report identifies 118 climate-themed funds with an aggregate AUM of US$18Bn and examines the presence of fossil fuel reserves owned by the companies held by these funds.
In the wake of shareholder resolutions at Rio Tinto in both the UK and Australia over its links with climate-lobbying trade groups, new research from UK thinktank InfluenceMap identifies the 10 major global companies who maintain extensive networks of trade associations and lobbyists whose aggregate positions on climate are most misaligned with their own.
As BP's 2017 Energy Outlook is published, this note summarises BP's performance on climate risk disclosure and highlights climate lobbying activity.
This report tracks the links between the coal reserves, operating coal companies and shareholders who own these companies, showing roughly $185bn in shareholder value associated with 117 listed thermal coal producers/owners.
In light of the ExxonMobil case, we queried our database to see what the top 20 US industrial companies are saying about climate risk to regulators and investors.
Research suggests ExxonMobil spent $27m and Shell $22m to obstruct climate legislation in 2015, with the American Petroleum Institute and two smaller trade associations spending a further $74m on behalf of the entire industry.
A year on from Paris, France comes top in the analysis of the G7 countries but there is significant misalignment among other members on their commitment to phase out fossil fuel subsidies by 2025.