FinanceMap scores this financial institution in the following areas. Please navigate to the relevant tab for in-depth analysis
FinanceMap assesses these portfolios for this financial institution. Please navigate to the relevant tab for in-depth analysis.
Portfolio Paris Alignment analysis of this institution's activities in this portfolio area in 2020–2021.
Value Assessed: $82.5B
Sector Paris Alignment scores for the sectors to which this portfolio has exposure. FinanceMap Paris Alignment analysis is limited to the automotive, upstream fossil fuel, and power sectors.
Portfolio Paris Alignment analysis of this institution's activities in this portfolio area in 2020–2021.
Value Assessed: $72.7B
Sector Paris Alignment scores for the sectors to which this portfolio has exposure. FinanceMap Paris Alignment analysis is limited to the automotive, upstream fossil fuel, and power sectors.
Fossil fuel production companies are defined as those with primary sector of operations in the up-, mid-, and/or downstream segments of fossil fuel production. Green companies are defined as companies having over 75% revenue deriving from Substantial Contribution to Mitigation activities under the EU Taxonomy.
Portion of AUM Assessed: $4.64B
Sector Paris Alignment scores for the sectors in which the asset manager has shareholdings. FinanceMap Paris Alignment analysis is limited to the automotive, upstream fossil fuel, and power sectors.
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Brazilian Electric Power Co | 54.0% |
| Light SA | 14.6% |
| Drax Group PLC | 7.6% |
| Enel Chile SA | 3.9% |
| Tauron Polska Energia SA | 3.7% |
| PGE Polska Grupa Energetyczna SA | 3.0% |
| Companhia Paranaense de Energia | 2.5% |
| Ze Pak Sa | 2.3% |
| Energy of Minas Gerais Co | 1.5% |
| CPFL Energia SA | 0.9% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Stellantis NV | 44.9% |
| Mercedes Benz Group AG | 16.9% |
| Mazda Motor Corp | 12.9% |
| General Motors Co | 11.6% |
| Toyota Motor Corp | 9.1% |
| Tesla Inc | 3.9% |
| Honda Motor Co Ltd | 0.7% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Jastrzebska Spolka Weglowa SA | 89.0% |
| Glencore PLC | 11.0% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Petroleo Brasileiro SA Petrobras | 80.0% |
| TotalEnergies SE | 5.8% |
| Jadestone Energy PLC | 4.0% |
| Aker BP ASA | 3.0% |
| Shell PLC | 1.4% |
| Eni SpA | 1.4% |
| Polskie Gornictwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo SA | 1.2% |
| Tullow Oil PLC | 1.1% |
| Petro Rio SA | 0.7% |
| BP PLC | 0.6% |
All equity funds that FinanceMap has identified as being managed by this asset manager. Click through to a fund's profile page to view in-depth analysis.
Santander Asset Management (Santander or SAM) does not appear to be actively engaging with companies around climate change. SAM has developed a new Net Zero Stewardship Strategy for prioritizing high emitters and pushing for science-based transition plans, however, it does not appear to have yet engaged with companies using this framework. It does appear to follow a defined engagement structure to monitor its engagements, and has laid out an escalation response driven by engagement outcomes which may include joining a collaborative initiative, exercising its voting rights, divesting, etc.
Santander does have some examples of engagements on climate change, such as its engagement with a power utility company on net zero commitments and developing a transition plan, as well as its engagement with a real estate company on climate disclosures and publishing climate plans. It is unclear if the asset manager is engaging on climate policy influence. SAM is a member of CA100+ and appears to be participating in collaborative engagements with the initiative, having led engagements with a company in the power and utilities sector.
Santander has described its stewardship governance structure and detailed the teams and committees that are involved with its stewardship processes. The asset manager has limited transparency about engagements, and only provides anonymous case studies. It discloses some of its proxy voting record but does not provide voting data for companies based in Latin America and does not give voting rationale. SAM does not provide examples or demonstrate willingness to use shareholder authority on climate.
ProxyInsight data suggests that Santander is generally unsupportive of climate resolutions, supporting 63.6% in 2018, 33.3% in 2019, and 25% in 2020. However, due to the small sample sizes in 2019 and 2020, it is unclear if the data is representative of Santander's climate voting record.
FinanceMap's methodology to measure the engagement process on climate was developed in consultation with several of the world's leading asset managers and uses key aspects of the UK Financial Reporting Council's 2020 Stewardship Code . The Stewardship Code was chosen to benchmark engagement quality as it provides an ambitious framework and detailed definitions of what constitutes effective engagement. FinanceMap defines the term ‘engagement’ as referring to all investor actions undertaken to influence the management strategy of the companies they own including private communications with corporate management and appointed advisors; questions at AGMs/other company meetings; comments on the company in the media; escalation and the shareholder resolution process (filing, voting behavior). FinanceMap’s methodology breaks the engagement process down into a set of sub-activities and looks for evidence associated with these across publicly available data sources.
Climate-relevance categorization of shareholder resolutions is based on the IPCC’s Special Report on 1.5°C and its concluded need for “rapid and far-reaching transitions in land, energy, industry, buildings, transport, and cities.” FinanceMap scored voting on any resolution where the intent and likely outcome is consistent with this IPCC stated need. The voting data is drawn from asset managers' disclosures to the US Security Exchange Commission (SEC), asset manager websites (including third-party websites they link to), directly from the asset managers, and through specialist voting data provider Insightia. The full list of resolutions assessed is available here.
The following table outlines the key queries and data sources, which FinanceMap uses to assess financial institutions’ sustainable finance policy engagement. Every evidence piece is assessed on a five-point scale of -2,-1,0,1,2 or NA (not applicable)/NS (not scored). All queries, data sources, and evidence pieces are weighted against one another in a matrix system to arrive at a final top-level score. Clicking on specific cells will load the underlying evidence and information on how it has been assessed.
Santander appears to have had a moderate amount of engagement on sustainable finance policy, with mixed positions which have become increasingly positive since 2019.
Santander has stated support for a role for finance in meeting the goals of the Paris Agreement and net-zero by 2050, particularly as a member of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA). Santander has further advocated for action to achieve zero-carbon economies by 2050 in joint investor statements to governments in 2022 and 2021. In response to UK HM Treasury in 2022, it also supported the HM Treasury's proposal to update the regulatory principles for sustainable growth and refer to "climate change" and "net-zero economy". However, in a sector forum in May 2022, Santander CEO José Antonio Álvarez stated that it is not 'comfortable' being the 'climate police' and urged for more clarity from governments on what companies are expected to do.
Santander has offered high-level support for sustainable finance policies in its Climate Finance reports. It stated high-level support for the EU taxonomy in its 2020-2021 Climate Finance report, as well as for the EU’s Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD). In a 2021 website article, Santander further supported the European Central Bank’s economy-wide climate stress tests. In its 2021-2023 Climate Finance reports, Santander further supported efforts in ESG-related disclosures, such as those being developed by the ISSB and EFRAG. In joint investor letters to governments in 2021 and 2022, Santander did support the mandatory implementation of the TCFD and 1.5 pathway-aligned transition plans. In the 2022 statement, it also advocated for mandatory climate risk disclosure and prudential risk supervision.
In its 2023 Climate Finance Report, Santander encouraged policymakers to simplify the EU Taxonomy framework in a way that "banks and non-financial companies alike can implement the requirements in a more straightforward way". However, in a shareholders meeting in 2022, Ana Botín, Chairman at Santander, called for the EU to define the classification of investments to define net-zero aligned lending as soon as possible.
In its 2021 CDP response, Santander disclosed it worked very closely with industry associations, including the Institute of International Finance (IIF), European Financial Services Round Table, the Association for Financial Markets in Europe (AFME), and the European Banking Federation (EBF) on a number of policies with a “support with minor exceptions” position, such as the EU Taxonomy, the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) and identification of climate risks. In its 2022 CDP response, Santander disclosed that it is engaging with industry associations on their positions on the EU Green Bond Standard with a supportive position. In a meeting with the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) in the US, Santander, as a constituent of the Bank Policy Institute, outlined challenges to draft principles for climate-related financial risk management.
In several of its Climate Finance reports, Santander has stated it is engaging on a number of relevant sustainable finance policies, but only describing policy positions in broad terms. It also does not appear to disclose all material evidence of direct sustainable finance policy engagement identified by InfluenceMap's database. It has also published a partial account of its industry associations' positions and engagement activities on specific sustainable finance policies in its own reporting. However, it does not provide an account for more than 3 industry associations which are actively engaged on sustainable finance policy, including the IIF, the European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA), Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) and UK Finance.
InfluenceMap’s methodology for assessing lobbying on sustainable finance policy closely follows InfluenceMap’s established methodology on climate policy engagement, which is used extensively by investors, including via the Climate Action 100+ investor engagement process. Our full methodology can be found here.
Under our assessment of sustainable finance lobbying, InfluenceMap considers engagement on all financial policies which intersect with climate and/or other sustainability issues. The analysis takes into account both the engagement of the financial institution and the activities of industry associations they hold membership of.
InfluenceMap’s methodology covers seven publicly available data sources, searching for evidence of engagement and corporate positioning since 2017. To determine the policy issues within the scope of the analysis, InfluenceMap breaks down sustainable finance policy engagement into a series of subcategories, or 'queries'. These are designed to cover high-level issues relating to the importance of sustainable finance, as well as more specific areas of sustainable finance policymaking. InfluenceMap’s research process searches for evidence of an organization's engagement with each sustainable finance policy issue, across each of the data sources.
The following table outlines the key queries and data sources, which FinanceMap uses to assess asset managers' corporate engagement programs. Every evidence piece is assessed on a five-point scale of -2,-1,0,1,2 or NA (not applicable)/NS (not scored). All queries, data sources, and evidence pieces are weighted against one another in a matrix system to arrive at a final top-level score. Clicking on specific cells will load the underlying evidence and information on how it has been assessed.
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.
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Ana Botín is chair of the board of the IIF (last checked September 2023).
Ana Botín (Group Executive Chairman)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Ana Botín is chair of the board of the IIF (last checked September 2023).
Ana Botín (Group Executive Chairman)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Maria Begoña Aláez Esteban is listed as a member of EuropeanIssuers' policy committee (last checked September 2023)
Maria Begoña Aláez Esteban (Public Policy & Regulation, Grupo Santander)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Banco Santander is a member of EuropeanIssuers
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Maria Begoña Aláez Esteban is listed as a member of EuropeanIssuers' policy committee (last checked September 2023)
Maria Begoña Aláez Esteban (Public Policy & Regulation, Grupo Santander)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Banco Santander is a member of EuropeanIssuers
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Carlos Ciervide is a member of AFME board of directors (last checked September 2023).
Carlos Ciervide (Head of Market Activities in Spain and Portugal, Santander)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
José Manuel Colina is a member of AFME board of directors (last checked September 2022).
José Manuel Colina (Head of Markets Activities)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Carlos Ciervide is a member of AFME board of directors (last checked September 2023).
Carlos Ciervide (Head of Market Activities in Spain and Portugal, Santander)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
José Manuel Colina is a member of AFME board of directors (last checked September 2022).
José Manuel Colina (Head of Markets Activities)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Santander appears to be a member of the "Sustainability Committee; ISSB; Green Finance Strategy; Transition Task Force; Mortgages; SMEs; and Climate Risk" at UK Finance (Santander UK Group Holdings, ESG Supplement 2022).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Santander Asset Management / Santander Invoice Finance / Santander Private Banking / Santander UK Plc are members of UK Finance (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Santander appears to be a member of the "Sustainability Committee; ISSB; Green Finance Strategy; Transition Task Force; Mortgages; SMEs; and Climate Risk" at UK Finance (Santander UK Group Holdings, ESG Supplement 2022).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Santander Asset Management / Santander Invoice Finance / Santander Private Banking / Santander UK Plc are members of UK Finance (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander is a member of BPI (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander is a member of BPI (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander US Capital Markets, LLC is a member of SIFMA (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander US Capital Markets, LLC is a member of SIFMA (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander Asset Management is a member of the Investment Association (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander Asset Management is a member of the Investment Association (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander is a member of the AEB (Asociación Española de Banca), which is a national association member of the EBF (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Ana Botin is President of the EBF Board. As of July 2023, this no longer appears to be the case.
Ana Botin (Group Executive Chairman at Banco Santander)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Banco Santander is a member of UK Finance which is a national association member of EBF
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander is a member of the AEB (Asociación Española de Banca), which is a national association member of the EBF (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Ana Botin is President of the EBF Board. As of July 2023, this no longer appears to be the case.
Ana Botin (Group Executive Chairman at Banco Santander)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Banco Santander is a member of UK Finance which is a national association member of EBF
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Multiple subsidiaries of Santander (e.g. Santander Generales Seguros y Reaseguros) are members of UNESPA which is a national association member of Insurance Europe (last checked September 2023)
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
Multiple subsidiaries of Santander (e.g. Santander Generales Seguros y Reaseguros) are members of UNESPA which is a national association member of Insurance Europe (last checked September 2023)
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander Asset Management is a member of the IIGCC (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Santander Asset Management is a member of the IIGCC (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
Santander's board has incorporated climate-related issues into corporate strategy, for example, in February 2021, it announced a net zero by 2050 commitment. The RBSCC committee of the board has oversight of climate change within the responsible banking strategy and has discussed climate change in relation to business plans and sector analysis. Climate-related responsibilities have been clearly assigned across specialized working groups and there are clear processes in place to ensure board committees are informed and monitor progress of climate-related issues and initiatives.
Santander provides clear examples of banking risk types and the material impacts expected from physical and transition risks over different time horizons. Additionally, it describes the processes used to determine which risks and opportunities could have a material financial impact on the organization. Additionally, it references the actions it has taken to address climate-related risks and opportunities across business areas, including advisory, lending, and asset management.
It has provided some examples of how it has considered the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on its corporate strategy planning in its CDP disclosure and Climate Finance report. Santander has tested the resilience of its business strategy to climate-related risks and opportunities using various scenarios on certain portfolios, including: the oil and gas, mining and steel sectors, the EU power portfolio, and its UK mortgage portfolio. It has also participated in the Bank of England's Biennial Exploratory Scenario for Climate Change (CBES) and the ECB Climate Risk Stress Test.
Santander is transparent around the processes used for identifying and prioritizing climate-related risks. For example, the organization has developed an internal risk taxonomy and heat map to identify sectors exposed to transition and physical climate risks. Furthermore, Santander has considered climate-related risks into assessments of numerous risk categories.
It has outlined various risk management processes that are used to manage climate-related risks across the group, which includes environmental and social risk policies on specific sectors as well as risk principles that guides employees in the management of risks.
Santander appears to have integrated climate-related risks into its overall risk management and will continue to embed them into the group’s processes. For example, climate change has been incorporated into the organization’s risk appetite statement, and physical and transition risks were integrated into the group’s risk management framework in 2020. It has also incorporated climate risk management in its one year budgeting, three year planning, and overall strategic planning.
Santander is transparent about key metrics used to measure and manage climate-related risks and opportunities, including metrics on green financing and metrics used to assess the impact of transition and physical climate risks on its balance sheet.
It discloses Scope 1, Scope 2, and relevant Scope 3 emissions data and has some Scope 3 portfolio impacts disclosure. It has started using and disclosing financed emissions from its customers using the PCAF methodology. Additionally, it has assessed aligning its power generation portfolio using PACTA and the IEA Net Zero Emissions scenario, and has made progress in other three material sectors: oil and gas, transport, and mining and metals. It has further disclosed financed emissions of its energy, steel, and aviation portfolios in its 2022 Climate Finance Report.
In February 2021, Santander announced a net-zero by 2050 target, supported by interim decarbonization targets. Following this, in April 2021, it joined the Net Zero Banking Alliance as a founding signatory. It plans to release details for its net-zero roadmap later in 2021, and release full targets by September 2022. Santander has released its proposed 2030 target for the power sector and in its 2022 Climate Finance Report, it released 2030 interim targets for the energy, steel, and aviation sector in line with the IEA NZE 2050 scenario.
The organization has established various coal financing exclusion policies, prohibited investment or providing financial services for new coal-fired power plants and the development of associated infrastructure. Similar restrictions are placed on coal mining companies. In February 2021, Santander announced decarbonization targets, stating it would eliminate all exposure to thermal coal mining worldwide by 2030 and stop financing to power generation clients with more than 10% of revenues dependent on thermal coal by 2030.
Santander has set exclusionary policies that prohibit natural gas and oil projects north of the Arctic circle, and fracking or tar sands projects. In April 2022, it strengthened its oil financing policies, however its support for natural gas financing remains largely unchanged. It will no longer provide project-related financing to Oil upstream greenfield projects - however this is limited to greenfield oil projects, so the expansion of existing assets and natural gas assets are not included.
It appears to support nuclear given due diligence to ensure clients meet international safety standards. However, it does not appear to have a clear position on nuclear power in the energy mix in general. Santander has communicated support for a low carbon economy and is increasing its financing of renewables. In the first half of 2022, Santander was ranked as the world leader in renewable energy finance.
FinanceMap’s Climate Governance and Policies analysis assesses statements financial institutions (FIs) are making on how they are incorporating climate issues into their decision-making and operations using FinanceMap’s matrix methodology. This methodology is adapted from the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations and guidelines, Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) or equivalent Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net-Zero (GFANZ) initiative reporting, and IPCC and IEA technology statements. The TCFD provide guidance on 11 recommendations across four areas which are reflected in our matrix: Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets. Additional benchmarks have been introduced to strengthen the ambition of scoring criteria in the assessment of targets, which are supplemented by guidance from the NZBA or equivalent GFANZ initiatives.
Additionally, Science-Based Policy (SBP) benchmarks are used to measure alignment of an FIs technology positions with the science of climate change. These benchmarks are applied to an FIs internal policies on technologies including coal, oil, gas, nuclear, and renewables and also assesses its engagement with broader climate and energy policy issues such as advocacy on the role and importance of different strategy types in the future energy mix.
For each TCFD recommendation and technology, FIs statements are applied to a five point scoring scale ranging from +2 to -2, measuring alignment with the relevant benchmarks. The detailed scores for this FI are displayed below within each matrix cell.
The following table outlines the key queries and data sources, which FinanceMap uses to assess financial institutions climate governance, targets and policies. Every evidence piece is assessed on a five-point scale of -2,-1,0,1,2 or NA (not applicable)/NS (not scored). All queries, data sources, and evidence pieces are weighted against one another in a matrix system to arrive at a final top-level score. Clicking on specific cells will load the underlying evidence and information on how it has been assessed.
Open PDF file of Data Source
Open PDF file of Data Source