The diagram below charts the Total Score and global Engagement Intensity for the companies and industry associations operating in Europe that are most significant to climate change.
Companies in the top right exhibit active and supportive policy engagement, while those in the top left are active and oppositional. Companies towards the bottom of the quadrant are less actively engaged on climate policy.
The charts below break down the universe of major European companies scored by InfluenceMap by their Organisation Score, an assessment of their direct policy engagement activities
InfluenceMap has detected a significant shift in corporate climate policy engagement in the EU, with 26% of companies now broadly aligned with the Paris Agreement in their direct policy engagement up from 4% in 2018.
Many companies have also shifted from opposing to Paris Agreement-aligned policy, to adopting mixed positions. The proportion of companies opposing climate policy has dropped from 33% in 2018 to 21% in 2022.
This reform is often only partial, for example many companies support some forms of climate policy, often high-level ambition for emissions reductions, subsidies and incentives, but remain oppositional to tougher regulatory measures. In 2022, 53% of companies had mixed alignment with the Paris Agreement.
The utilities, consumer and retail sectors lead in supportive policy engagement, while other sectors – including aviation, metals & mining – remain clear laggards.
The graphs below break down the universe of major European industry associations scored by InfluenceMap by their Organisation Score, an assessment of their direct policy engagement activities
The diagram below shows the most highly engaged companies on EU climate policy. The values show the number of times the company has lobbied on ‘Fit for 55’ policies tracked on this platform during 2020-21.
The diagram below shows the most highly engaged industry associations on EU climate policy. The values show the number of times the industry association has lobbied on ‘Fit for 55’ policies tracked on this platform during 2020-21.
While the majority of the top five most engaged companies on EU climate policy are broadly aligned with the Paris Agreement in their lobbying (grade B and above), the majority of the top five most engaged industry associations are broadly misaligned (D and below).
The power of industry association lobbying is demonstrated by the notable difference in instances of engagement between the most engaged companies and industry associations, with industry associations engaging almost twice as frequently as companies.
While supportive companies are working actively to advocate in favor of climate policy, InfluenceMap's analysis indicates that industry associations remain largely aligned with the minority of companies pushing against Paris Agreement-aligned climate policy. Unsupportive entities are therefore able to leverage significant influence via highly engaged industry associations, while the positions of supportive companies benefit far less from the power of industry associations.
Overall, InfluenceMap found that the most common corporate engagement on the ‘Fit for 55’ files analyzed was unsupportive. So far this influence has resulted in a reduction in policy ambition across the majority of 'Fit for 55' package files, benchmarked against the high ambition options considered in the EU Commission impact assessments.
InfluenceMap’s EU platform’s ‘Policy Tracker’ provides full detail of policy influencing developments across key files within the Fit for 55 package.
It is designed as a resource for interventions, engagement and reporting on the legislating of Paris-aligned climate policy that is at risk of being weakened or undermined by oppositional corporate and industry influence.
In January 2022, the French Ecology Minister announced priority climate policies within the ‘Fit for 55’ Package to fast-track during its EU presidency, including the CBAM, the EU ETS update, CO2 Standards for Light Duty Vehicles and the Energy Efficiency Directive.
All four policies are scheduled undergo key votes in the EU Parliament in April-June 2022.
An alternative to existing carbon leakage protections measures, the CBAM would replace free emissions allowances under the EU ETS.
Heavy industry actors, in particular the steel industry, including Eurofer, ArcelorMittal, and thyssenkrupp in November and December 2021, have focused lobbying on opposing the CBAM proposal to phase out free allocation in the EU ETS from 2026
The EU Parliament has proposed a far more ambitious timeline for phasing out free allowances, setting up a policy influencing battle ahead of the Environment Committee’s vote on the proposal in May 2022.
The EU Commission’s proposal for the Energy Efficiency Directive introduced an ambitious increase in the ‘energy savings obligation’ for member states.
The increased energy savings obligation has attracted strong, cross-sector push-back, including from the International Federation of Industrial Energy Consumers (IFIEC), FuelsEurope and the German Chemical Industry Association (VCI), cross sector associations such as BusinessEurope and the utilities sector, including Eurelectric.
This push-back appears to have already translated into opposition within the EU Council, as several member states reportedly described the energy savings obligation as “too ambitious” in December 2021.
The EU Commission has proposed an ambitious 2035 zero-emissions CO2 target for light duty vehicles, coupled with an interim target of 55% by 2030.
The 2035 standard has been strongly opposed throughout the fossil fuel value chain, including by the German Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA), the European Association of Automotive Suppliers (CLEPA), and FuelsEurope. However, Volkswagen and Volvo Cars split with the rest of the automotive sector in H2 2021, welcoming the 2035 target, which is supported by some members of the renewable energy sector.
Despite ambitious proposals from the Commission and Parliament, the French Presidency appears to support a later zero emissions date of 2040, creating a risk that the proposal is watered down in the EU Council.