Negative lobbying by the world’s largest automakers is putting global climate targets at risk | InfluenceMap
INSIGHT by InfluenceMap
2024-05-15
Published by investESG
![article image](https://esg.guide/assets/image/507/91GIzqdaB1ugqTCM0BDCHwGYqvEOTXlk3I6Rka3e_101_large.jpg)
New InfluenceMap analysis finds that negative lobbying by the world’s largest automakers is putting global climate targets at risk and threatening the transition to electric vehicles. This report analyses the climate policy engagement strategies of fifteen of the largest global automakers in seven key regions (Australia, EU, Japan, India, South Korea, UK, US). It shows how even in countries where major climate legislation has recently passed, such as the US and Australia, the ambition of these policies has been weakened due to industry pressure.
All fifteen automakers, except Tesla, have actively advocated against at least one policy promoting electric vehicles. Ten of the fifteen showed a particularly high intensity of negative engagement and scored a final grade of D or D+ by InfluenceMap’s methodology. Toyota is the lowest-scoring company in this analysis, driving opposition to climate regulations promoting battery electric vehicles in multiple regions, including the US, Australia and UK. Of all automakers analyzed, only Tesla (scoring B) is found to have positive climate advocacy aligned with science-based policy.
The research highlights how automakers have employed their industry associations to aggressively push back on ambitious climate rules globally. For example, Australia’s New Vehicle Efficiency Standards, announced in March 2024, were watered down following intense advocacy from the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI). The final policy is estimated to result in a 50% reduction in emissions by 2029, rather than the 60% reduction that was initially proposed. In the US, the industry group Alliance for Automotive Innovation successfully drove calls to weaken proposed GHG emission standards. Every automaker included in the study except Tesla remains a member of at least two of these groups, with most automakers a member of at least five.
![investESG 86.jpg](https://esg.guide/assets/image/508/QGNR7DpmPR6As6xAuFPMQcZ82doPIvcVpAZU04Nl_102_medium.jpg)
Only three of fifteen companies – Tesla, Mercedes Benz and BMW – are forecast to produce enough electric vehicles by 2030 to meet the International Energy Agency’s updated 1.5°C pathway of 66% electric vehicle (battery electric (BEV), fuel cell (FCEV) and plug-in hybrids (PHEVs)) sales according to InfluenceMap’s independent analysis of industry-standard data from February 2024. Current industry forecasts analyzed for this report show automaker production will reach only 53% electric vehicles in 2030. Transport is the third-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) globally, and road transport is failing to decarbonize at anywhere near the rate of many other industries.
InfluenceMap’s report also finds that Japanese automakers are the least prepared for an electric vehicle transition and are engaging the hardest against it. The three lowest-scoring automakers by climate policy engagement are all Japanese (Toyota, Suzuki and Mazda), with global advocacy strategies promoting policies to lock in a longer-term role for ICE-powered vehicles, including hybrids. The four companies with the lowest forecast electric vehicle production in 2030 were also all from Japan – Suzuki at 10%, Honda at 24%, Toyota at 29% and Mazda at 30%.
Additionally, the analysis shows that the rapidly increasing production of larger passenger vehicles continues to threaten global climate targets. Automakers are forecast to increase SUV and light trucks production globally (from 57% of global light-duty sales in 2020 to 64% in 2030), while pushing for regulations that promote larger vehicles. With SUVs’ higher oil consumption estimated to account for one-third of total oil demand growth between 2021 and 2022, such a strategy represents a growing climate problem.
Photo credit: © Denin Lawley
All opinions expressed are those of the author and/or quoted sources. investESG.eu is an independent and neutral platform dedicated to generating debate around ESG investing topics.
More insights from "investESG"
-
Published by investESG
2024-07-08
Can we trust the numbers behind ESG? | Richard Hardyment
INSIGHT by Richard Hardyment, the author of the book ‘Measuring Good Business: Making Sense of…
-
Published by investESG
2024-07-05
Closing the global biodiversity funding gap is addressing systemic challenges | Emine Isciel
INSIGHT by Emine Isciel, Head of Climate and Environment at Storebrand and co-chair of the Finance…
-
Published by investESG
2024-05-15
ESMA Guidelines for fund names to harmonize ESG and sustainability terms
INSIGHT by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA)…
Related insights
-
Published by Global Reporting Initiative
2024-08-28
Climate Week NYC: join GRI’s push for enhanced corporate transparency
Our engagements and events influencing the agenda in New York City…
-
Published by investESG
2024-04-09
Mission: Transition | WWF
INSIGHT by Nicolas Poolen, Senior Manager, Nature Positive Finance, WWF International…
-
Published by Global Reporting Initiative
2024-02-14
Route map to climate accountability and a just transition
Two weeks to go in consultation on the new GRI Climate Change and Energy Standards…
Related insights
-
Published by investESG
2024-02-07
Red flags and green flags: Is your transition plan fit for purpose and greenwashing-proof?
INSIGHT by Reclaim Finance…
-
Published by investESG
2024-01-10
The role of water security in reaching net-zero emissions: energy companies deeply exposed to water risks | CDP
Data released today by the global non-profit, CDP, provides fresh insight into how companies and…
-
Published by investESG
2024-01-08
Moving from pledges to implementation: a guide for corporate just transition action | World Benchmarking Alliance
brief INSIGHT by the World Benchmarking Alliance…