This briefing finds that a significant majority of Australia’s most influential companies and industry associations are failing to translate their supportive top-line messaging on climate into positive and strategic engagement with climate policy. The research analyzes the climate policy engagement of the 70 largest companies active in Australia and the 25 most influential industry associations (as assessed on InfluenceMap’s Australia Platform)1 during the Federal Labor Party’s first year in office, which were selected based on various factors including their CO₂ emissions, sector, and total revenue.
While 83 of the 95 companies and industry groups (87%) included in the analysis issued top-line support for climate action during the first year of Labor Government, only 35% went on to issue supportive comments in federal consultations relating to high-level climate targets and strategies, and only 10% went on to issue supportive comments in federal consultations on specific emissions reduction policy.
Australia’s climate policy engagement landscape during the Labor Government's first year in office is dominated by fossil fuel Interests. InfluenceMap’s research shows that 13 of the 15 companies most engaged on climate during this period are from the energy and mining sectors, and are involved in either the production, procurement, or distribution of fossil fuels. In addition, the analysis finds that 13 of the 15 most engaged companies and 13 of the 15 most engaged industry associations between May 2022 and May 2023 advocated for a continued role for fossil fuels that is misaligned with the advice of IPCC science on the global use of coal and gas in 1.5°C decarbonization pathways.
The lack of positive advocacy for climate policy and disproportionate fossil fuel representation threatens to undermine the achievement of policy which would deliver Australia’s climate targets. These trends also appear to have contributed to the fossil fuel sector securing several big concessions during the Labor Government’s first year in office, such as formalized approvals for Bowen Coking Coal's Isaac River Coal Mine, Santos' coal seam gas expansion in Queensland's Surat Basin, and offshore oil and gas exploration across nearly 47,000 square kilometers of Australian waters.
The research also finds that despite 14 of the 15 most engaged companies on climate in Australia during the period of analysis having active net zero commitments in place, 10 (71%) of these companies are at risk of “net zero greenwash” due to their policy engagement activities. Using the UN High-Level Expert Group 'Integrity Matters' guidance on lobbying as a benchmark, this briefing considers a company to be at risk of “net zero greenwash” if it has announced a net zero or similar target but is not sufficiently supportive of policy to deliver the Paris Agreement according to InfluenceMap’s LobbyMap platform.
Misleading climate policy communications are similarly present among Australia’s 15 most engaged industry associations on climate between May 2022 – May 2023. InfluenceMap’s analysis finds that despite all 15 associations having issued top-line statements in support of net zero by 2050 or the goals of the Paris Agreement, 12 (80%) of these groups are not sufficiently supportive of policy to achieve these goals according to the LobbyMap platform. As a result, these groups are at risk of undermining the credibility of their pro-climate communications due to their policy engagement.
1 The companies and industry associations included in this research are those that InfluenceMap tracks on an ongoing basis as part of its Australia analysis. These entities were selected based on several factors, including CO₂ emissions, total revenue, and key sector coverage. Further details as to how these companies and industry associations have been selected can be found here.
"We all know there is a big mismatch between what companies say and what they’re actually doing on climate. We see companies like Santos and Woodside claiming they’re aiming for net-zero emissions while continuing to progress new fossil fuel developments. These two things can’t be true. We also know this extends to their lobbying behind the scenes. Like the evidence we now have that Santos influenced the government’s decision to introduce the 'Sea Dumping' Bill. This will allow exports of emissions under the guise of carbon capture and storage so gas companies can continue to expand their operations. This research from InfluenceMap helps shine a light on which companies are serious about emissions reductions and which ones are just talking the talk while actively lobbying against climate action. These companies are putting the future of the people and places we love at risk."
David Pocock, Independent Senator for the ACT
"This research demonstrates the dominance of the fossil fuel voice in climate policy engagement, a critical concern of responsible investors including Australian Ethical. The interests of these few are dominating over the interests of other businesses, investors and the community who all benefit from effective climate policy that limits warming consistent with the Paris Agreement. We need science based climate policy, and we need to hear voices from across the economy talking to government about what they stand to lose if we don’t limit warming."
Persephone Fraser, Senior Ethics Analyst at Australian Ethical Investment
In April 2022, the UN’s climate science body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), released its Sixth Assessment Report: Mitigation of Climate Change. The report emphasizes the need to substantially reduce fossil fuel consumption and shift investments from fossil fuels toward low-carbon technologies in order to limit global warming to 2°C. It also reiterates the importance of regulatory action at various levels of government to achieve the necessary emissions reductions.
International bodies have consistently identified the need for decisive policy interventions by governments around the world to drive the energy transition and reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Despite this urgent, science-based guidance, the policy plans of the world’s governments fall short of global climate goals. In its 2022 Emissions Gap Report, the UN Environment Program finds that current climate policies globally point to a 2.8°C temperature rise by the end of the century, and that only an “urgent system-wide transformation” will deliver the necessary GHG emissions reductions.
The IPCC’s April 2022 report identified “opposition from status quo interests that are exerting political influence” as a key reason for the lack of progress on climate policy globally, and added that fossil fuel companies, both upstream and downstream, make up the majority of organizations opposed to climate action.
On 23 May 2022 the Australian Labor Party, led by Anthony Albanese, won the 2022 Australian Federal "climate election”. Labor’s victory followed almost a decade of delayed climate action from the Liberal/National Coalition Government, with Albanese promising to get Australia out of the climate “naughty corner”. In its first year in office, Labor has moved to implement a range of climate and energy-related policies and measures, most notably legislating GHG emissions targets of 43 per cent by 2030 and net zero by 2050, and making subsequent reforms to the Safeguard Mechanism. A full timeline of the climate and energy-related consultations issued during Labor’s first year in office is displayed in figure 1 below.
Despite these steps towards climate reform, analysis by Climate Action Tracker finds that Labor’s policy plans remain misaligned with Paris Agreement climate goals. Climate Action Tracker notes that Australia’s 2030 GHG emissions target is inconsistent with limiting warming to 1.5°C, with global temperature rises projected to reach over 2°C and up to 3°C were all countries to follow Australia’s approach. Moreover, the Labor Government’s continued support for fossil fuel projects indicates a discrepancy with its stated climate ambition. As of March 2023, there were 116 new fossil gas, coal and oil projects on the Federal Government’s Resources and Energy Major Projects list. This reflects Australia’s high reliance on fossil fuels domestically, as well as its role as the world’s third largest fossil fuel exporter in CO₂ terms. This continued support for new fossil fuel projects is inconsistent with 1.5°C-aligned decarbonization pathways under the IPCC, which states with high confidence that "projected CO₂ emissions from existing fossil fuel infrastructure without additional abatement would exceed the remaining carbon budget for 1.5°C”.
This briefing draws on InfluenceMap’s world-leading database for analyzing corporate engagement with climate policy (LobbyMap) to provide a detailed assessment of Corporate Australia’s engagement on climate policy during the Labor Government’s first year in office. It builds upon InfluenceMap's September 2021 Australia research, which found many of Australia’s most economically significant companies and industry associations to be particularly obstructive to climate policy.
The LobbyMap methodology scrutinizes advocacy across seven publicly available data sources to provide a full measure of an entity’s overall climate policy engagement. Full details of the methodology are provided on the page linked here and in Appendix A. The 70 companies and 25 industry associations included in this research are those that InfluenceMap tracks on an ongoing basis as part of its Australia analysis. Details as to how those companies and industry associations have been selected can be found here. A current table ranking Australian companies and industry associations on their climate policy engagement can be found on InfluenceMap’s Australia platform.
For this briefing, InfluenceMap extensively monitored corporate engagement with ten federal-level climate and energy-related consultations issued during the first year of the Labor government. This research classifies these consultations into two separate categories: 1) those relating to high-level climate targets and strategies, and 2) those relating to specific emissions reduction policy. These consultations are listed in figure 2 below. Details as to why they were selected can be found in Appendix A.
Net Zero Tracker data is used to identify which companies tracked by InfluenceMap for this research have announced a net zero or similar “end-state” commitment. Where Net Zero Tracker data was not available for certain companies, evidence of net zero commitments have been sourced from companies’ sustainability reporting.
| Consultations relating to high-level climate targets and strategies | Consultations relating to specific emissions reduction policy |
|---|---|
| The Climate Chage Bill 2022 | The Safeguard Mechanism reform: consultation paper |
| The EPBC Amendment (Climate Trigger) Bill 2022 | The Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2022 |
| The National Electric Vehicle Strategy | The Safeguard Mechanism reform: consultation on proposed design |
| The Inquiry into Australia's transition to a green energy superpower | |
| The National Energy Performance Strategy | |
| The National Reconstruction Fund: Consultation Paper | |
| The Consultation on Incorporating an Emissions Reduction Objective into the national Energy Objectives |
Analyzing the engagement of corporations and industry associations on InfluenceMap’s Australia platform, this research finds evidence of a clear dichotomy between Corporate Australia’s top-line messaging on climate action and companies’ and industry associations’ actual engagement with climate policies during the first year of the Labor Government. This trend is displayed in figure 3 below.
The companies and industry associations included in this research are those that InfluenceMap tracks on an ongoing basis as part of its Australia Platform. This includes 70 companies and 25 industry associations. Of these 95 entities, 83 (87%) issued top-line support for climate action during the Labor Government’s first year in office, publicly supporting either net zero by 2050 or the Paris Agreement.
Of these 83 entities, only 29 (35%) went on to issue a supportive position on one or more of the 7 consultations relating to high-level climate targets and strategies included in this analysis, while only 8 of the 83 entities (10%) to have issued support for climate action adopted a supportive position on one or more of the 3 consultations relating to specific emissions reduction policy.
In total, 21 of the 83 entities (25%) to issue support for net zero or the Paris Agreement did not publicly engage across any of the consultations included in this analysis. Entities in this group include companies from a broad array of sectors, such as Commonwealth Bank and the Australia and New Zealand Banking Group from the financial sector, oil and gas companies Santos and ConocoPhillips, as well as Coles and Qantas. A full breakdown of corporate engagement with the climate-related consultations included in this analysis can be found in Appendix B and Appendix C.
InfluenceMap's research of corporate climate policy engagement during the Labor Government's first year in office finds evidence of much higher engagement from vested fossil fuel interests compared to other sectors. This trend is mapped in figures 4 and 5 below, which show the top 15 companies and top 15 industry associations most engaged with climate change policy in Australia during this period.
| Company | Sector | Instances of Climate Policy Engagement in Australia | Pro Fossil Fuel Advocacy? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fortescue Metals Group2 | Metals & Mining | 53 | X |
| Woodside | Energy | 44 | ✔ |
| Origin Energy | Energy | 38 | ✔ |
| AGL Energy | Energy | 36 | ✔ |
| Santos | Energy | 31 | ✔ |
| BP | Energy | 24 | ✔ |
| BHP | Metals & Mining | 24 | ✔ |
| Bluescope Steel | Metals & Mining | 22 | ✔ |
| Whitehaven Coal | Metals & Mining | 21 | ✔ |
| National Australia Bank | Financials | 19 | ✔ |
| Westpac Banking Corporation | Financials | 19 | X |
| Rio Tinto | Metals & Mining | 16 | ✔ |
| EnergyAustralia | Energy | 16 | ✔ |
| Tamboran Resources | Energy | 15 | ✔ |
| Shell | Energy | 13 | ✔ |
| Industry Association | Sector | Instances of Climate Policy Engagement in Australia | Pro Fossil Fuel Advocacy? |
|---|---|---|---|
| Australian Energy Producers (Formerly APPEA) | Energy | 113 | ✔ |
| Carbon Market Institute | Cross-sector | 111 | ✔ |
| Minerals Council of Australia | Metals & Mining | 91 | ✔ |
| Australian Energy Council | Energy | 82 | ✔ |
| Energy Efficiency Council | Energy | 67 | X |
| Electric Vehicle Council | Automobiles | 61 | X |
| Business Council of Australia | Cross-sector | 59 | ✔ |
| Australian Industry Group | Cross-sector | 47 | ✔ |
| Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries | Automobiles | 47 | ✔3 |
| Association of Mining and Exploration Companies | Metals & Mining | 42 | ✔ |
| New South Wales Minerals Council | Metals & Mining | 38 | ✔ |
| Australian Pipelines and Gas Association | Energy | 38 | ✔ |
| Chamber of Minerals and Energy of Western Australia | Metals & Mining | 36 | ✔ |
| Queensland Resources Council | Metals & Mining | 27 | ✔ |
| Cement Industry Federation | Construction Materials | 22 | ✔ |
3 While the FCAI have not directly advocated for an expansion of fossil fuels, they have opposed measures which would reduce the role of fossil fuels in the energy mix, including a 2035 phase out date for internal combustion engine vehicles in Australia.
13 of the 15 most engaged companies on climate during the Labor Government’s first year in office are from the energy and mining sectors, and are involved in either the production, procurement, or distribution of fossil fuels. Similarly, nine of the 15 most engaged industry associations are also from the energy and mining sectors, with seven directly representing the fossil fuel sector. The membership of the three cross-sector associations - the Business Council of Australia, the Carbon Market Institute and the Ai Group - also includes oil and gas companies such as Woodside and Shell. In contrast, entities from other sectors of the economy, such as construction materials, consumer staples, and transportation companies, display significantly lower levels of engagement.
In addition, 13 of the 15 most engaged companies and 13 of the 15 most engaged industry associations have directly lobbied or promoted the continued role of either coal or fossil gas during the first year of Labor Government. Such advocacy is misaligned with the findings of the latest IPCC report from March 2023, which states with high confidence that “projected CO₂ emissions from existing fossil fuel infrastructure without additional abatement would exceed the remaining carbon budget for 1.5°C".
In addition, the research finds that active opposition to climate-related consultations is largely concentrated to companies and industry associations representing the energy and mining sectors. This trend is displayed in figure 6 below.
InfluenceMap assessed 179 responses from 68 different companies and industry associations across the 10 climate and energy-related consultations included in this analysis. 78 (43%) of these responses were found to be unsupportive, promoting positions that were either misaligned with government proposals as set out in the consultations and/or misaligned with the advice of IPCC science on the global use of coal and gas in 1.5°C decarbonization pathways. In contrast, 71 (40%) of responses were supportive, while 30 (17%) assumed an unclear or mixed position. A full breakdown of these results can be found in Appendix B and Appendix C.
Of the 78 unsupportive responses across all the consultations included in this analysis, 63 (81%) came from entities belonging to the energy or mining sectors. Companies representing this group include Woodside, Glencore and Origin Energy, while industry associations include the Minerals Council of Australia and the Australian Energy Producers (Formerly APPEA). This strategic opposition to climate policy from the energy and mining sectors, in addition to the pro-fossil fuel-related advocacy of Australia’s most engaged companies and industry associations, points to the disproportional representation of fossil fuel interests in Australia’s climate policy engagement landscape during the Labor Government’s first year in office.
These climate policy engagement trends appear to have contributed to the fossil fuel sector securing several big concessions during the first year of Labor Government. Among these are formalized approvals for Bowen Coking Coal's Isaac River Coal Mine and Santos' coal seam gas expansion in Queensland's Surat Basin, as well as the approval of offshore oil and gas exploration across almost 47,000 square kilometers of Australian waters. In addition, analysis by the Australia Institute reveals that the total estimated value of fossil fuel subsidies - including capital value and budget paper forward estimates for 2022-23 Federal projects and programs - has grown to $49.7 billion during Labor’s first year in government, an increase of $1.7 billion from 2021-22.
There is an urgent need for Corporate Australia to align its positioning on the role of fossil fuels in the energy mix with 1.5°C-aligned decarbonization pathways under the IPCC if Australia is to successfully realize its 2030 and 2050 GHG emissions targets. The UN’s September 2023 synthesis report on the technical dialogue of the first global stocktake finds that “Scaling up renewable energy and phasing out all unabated fossil fuels are indispensable elements of just energy transitions to net zero emissions”.
This briefing also finds evidence of an emerging trend of “net zero greenwash”, a term coined by the United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres in November 2022 following the release of research by a UN High-Level Expert Group (HLEG) on credible net zero pledges. The 2022 UN HLEG ‘Integrity Matters’ report provides a “roadmap to prevent net zero from being undermined by false claims, ambiguity and ‘greenwash.’” It recommends actions for non-state actors to credibly demonstrate alignment with net zero by 2050, including through policy engagement, clearly stating that “non-state actors cannot lobby to undermine ambitious government climate policies either directly or through trade associations or other bodies.”
InfluenceMap’s research finds that 14 of the 15 most engaged companies on climate in Australia during the Labor Government’s first year in office have active net zero commitments in place. Of these 14, ten (71%) are at risk of “net zero greenwash” due to their policy engagement activities, with three (21%) at “significant risk” (InfluenceMap Performance Band D to F) and seven (50%) at “moderate risk” (InfluenceMap Performance Band C to D+). This trend is displayed in figure 7 below.
| Company | Performance Band | Has made internal net zero pledge? | Net Zero Greenwash Risk Register | Link to Company Pledge |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fortescue Metals Group | C+ | ✔ | N/A | FY23 Climate Change Report |
| AGL Energy | C+ | ✔ | N/A | Climate Transition Action Plan |
| National Australia Bank | C+ | ✔ | N/A | 2023 Climate Report |
| Westpac Banking Corporation | C+ | ✔ | N/A | Climate Change Position Statement & Action Plan |
| BP | C | ✔ | Moderate Risk | 2022 Sustainability Report |
| Shell | C | ✔ | Moderate Risk | Sustainability Report 2022 |
| Origin Energy | C- | ✔ | Moderate Risk | Climate Transition Action Plan |
| BHP | C- | ✔ | Moderate Risk | 2023 Annual Report |
| Bluescope Steel | C- | ✔ | Moderate Risk | FY2023 Annual Report |
| Energy Australia | C- | ✔ | Moderate Risk | Climate Transition Action Plan |
| Rio Tinto | D+ | ✔ | Moderate Risk | Climate Change Report 2022 |
| Santos | D | ✔ | Significant Risk | Climate Change Report 2023 |
| Woodside | D- | ✔ | Significant Risk | 2022 Climate Report |
| Whitehaven Coal | E+ | X | - | - |
| Tamboran Resources | E- | ✔ | Significant Risk | 2022 Sustainability Plan4 |
4 See also CEO comments at Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications
Using the UN HLEG 'Integrity Matters' guidance on lobbying as a benchmark, this briefing considers a company to be at risk of “net zero greenwash” due to its policy engagement if it has announced a net zero or similar target but is not sufficiently supportive of policy to deliver the Paris Agreement according to InfluenceMap’s LobbyMap platform. The assessment of policy engagement includes both the company's own engagement and that of its industry associations. InfluenceMap notes varying degrees of “net zero greenwash” risk, linked to policy engagement performance according to InfluenceMap’s Performance Band.
InfluenceMap’s ‘Performance Band’, is a full measure of a company’s climate policy engagement, accounting for both its own engagement and that of its industry associations. For companies, the ‘Organisation Score’ and ‘Relationship Score’ are combined to result in a total score that places the company in a Performance Band.
There are 16 Performance Bands from A+ (representing a total score from 95-100%) through to E- (a score of 25-30%), with scores below 25% falling in the red "F" band.
A+ to B: alignment between the Paris Agreement and the company’s detailed climate policy engagement.
B- to C+: mixed policy engagement, but increasingly supportive.
C to D+: supportive of some areas of climate policy but appears unsupportive of others.
D to F: misalignment between the Paris Agreement and the company’s detailed climate policy engagement.
NA: limited evidence has been collected on both a company's direct policy engagement (Organisation Score) and industry association links (Relationship Score)
No companies with active net zero commitments included in this analysis conduct climate policy engagement that is aligned with policy to deliver the Paris Agreement (InfluenceMap Performance Band A+ to B). Four companies – Fortescue, AGL Energy, National Australia Bank, and Westpac - are found to conduct mixed policy engagement activities but are increasingly supportive (InfluenceMap Performance Band B- to C+).
Woodside, Santos, and Tamboran Resources are assessed to be at significant risk of “net zero greenwash” due to their policy engagement. All three companies have announced a net zero or similar target, but InfluenceMap data finds their climate policy engagement to be misaligned with policy to deliver the Paris Agreement (InfluenceMap Performance Band D to F).
This trend of misleading climate policy communications is similarly present among Australia’s 15 most engaged industry associations on climate during the Labor Government’s first year in office. InfluenceMap’s analysis finds that despite all 15 associations having issued top-line statements in support of net zero by 2050 or the goals of the Paris Agreement, 12 (80%) of these groups are not sufficiently supportive of policy to deliver the Paris Agreement according to InfluenceMap’s LobbyMap platform. A breakdown of these industry associations’ climate commitments and InfluenceMap Performance Bands can be found in figure 8 below.
InfluenceMap data finds that the climate policy engagement activities of seven (47%) of these 15 industry associations are misaligned with policy to deliver the Paris Agreement (InfluenceMap Performance Band D to F), while five (33%) support some areas of climate policy but appear unsupportive of others (InfluenceMap Performance Band C to D+). As a result, these industry associations appear to be at risk of undermining the credibility of their pro-climate communications due to their policy engagement activities.
In contrast, only two industry associations included in this analysis – the Energy Efficiency Council and the Carbon Market Institute - conduct climate policy engagement activities aligned with policy to deliver the Paris Agreement (InfluenceMap Performance Band A+ to B).
