Airbus Group
What do our scores mean?
The organizational score represents the degree to which the organization influencing climate policy and legislation. Corporations also have relationship scores reflecting their links with influencers like trade associations. Both are combined to place the corporation in a performance band. Full details can be found here.
Engagement Intensity
The engagement intensity (EI) is a metric of the extent to which the company is engaging on climate change policy matters, whether positively or negatively. It is a number from 0 (no engagement at all) to 100 (full engagement on all queries/data points). Clearly energy companies are more affected by climate regulations and will have a higher EI than, for example retailers. So an organization’s score should be looked at in conjunction with this metric to gauge the amount of evidence we are using in each case as a basis for scoring. On our scale, an EI of more than 35 indicates a relatively large amount of climate policy engagement.
Relationship Score, December 2020
A new batch of industry associations has been uploaded onto the InfluenceMap system and the relationship scores recalculated accordingly.
Updated terminology, February 2021
We adjusted the terminology used to describe the queries running down the left-hand side of our scoring matrix and added additional explanatory text to the info-boxes. This has no impact on the scores and methodology. It has been done following user feedback to improve clarity.
- Details of Organization Score
-
What do the 0,1,2 and NSs, NAs mean?
Each cell in the organization's matrix presents a chance for us to assess each data source against our column of climate change policy queries. We score from -2 to 2, with negative scores representing evidence of obstructive influence. "NA" means "not applicable" and "NS" means "not scored" - that is we did not find any evidence either way. In both cases, the cell's weighting is re-distributed over others. Red and blue cells represent highly interesting negative or positive influence respectively. Full details can be found here.
- Details of Relationship Score
-
What is the Relationship Score
A corporation, as well as its organizational score will have a relationship score. It is computed by aggregating the organizational scores of the Influencers (trade bodies etc.) it has relationships with, weighted by both the strength of these relationships and the relative importance of the Influencers towards climate change policy. Full details can be found here.
|
QUERIES
|
DATA SOURCES | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Main Web Site
The main organizational Web site of the company and its direct links to major affiliates and attached documents. |
Social Media
We search other media and sites funded or controlled by the organization, such as social media (Twitter, Facebook) and direct advertising campaigns of the organization. |
CDP Responses
We assess and score responses to two questions from CDP's climate change information request (12.3 a & 12.3c) related to political influence questions (currently these are not numerically scored by the CDP process). |
Legislative Consultations
Comments from the entity being scored on governmental regulatory consultation processes, including those obtained by InfluenceMap through Freedom of Information requests. |
Media Reports
Here we search in a consistent manner (the organization name and relevant query search terms) a set of web sites of representing reputable news or data aggregations. Supported by targeted searches of proprietary databases. |
CEO Messaging
Here we search in a consistent manner (the CEO/Chairman, organization name and relevant query search terms) a set of web sites of representing reputable news or data aggregations. Supported by targeted searches of proprietary databases. |
Financial Disclosures
We search 10-K and 20-F SEC filings where available, and non US equivalents where not. . |
|
|
Communication of Climate Science
Is the organization transparent and clear about its position on climate change science? |
1
|
2
|
NA | NS |
1
|
NS | NS |
|
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
Is the organization supporting the science-based response to climate change as set out by the IPCC? (the IPCC) |
0
|
0
|
NA |
2
|
0
|
-1
|
NS |
|
Supporting the Need for Regulations
To what extent does the organization express the need for regulatory intervention to resolve the climate crisis? |
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
-1
|
NS |
|
Support of UN Climate Process
Is the organization supporting the UN FCCC process on climate change? |
NS |
2
|
NA | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Transparency on Legislation
Is the organisation transparent about its positions on climate change legislation/policy and its activities to influence it? |
-1
|
NA |
-1
|
NA | NA | NA | NS |
|
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
NS | NS | NS | NS |
-1
|
-2
|
NS |
|
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
NS |
-2
|
1
|
NS |
-1
|
-1
|
NS |
|
Energy and Resource Efficiency
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: energy efficiency policy, standards, and targets |
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Renewable Energy
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Renewable energy legislation, targets, subsidies, and other policy |
NS |
1
|
NS |
0
|
1
|
NS | NS |
|
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
Is the organization supporting an IPCC-aligned transition of the economy away from carbon-emitting technologies, including supporting relevant policy and legislative measures to enable this transition? |
1
|
1
|
NS |
1
|
0
|
-1
|
NS |
|
GHG Emission Regulation
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: GHG emission standards and targets. Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Standards, targets, and other regulatory measures directly targeting Greenhouse Gas emissions |
2
|
NS | NS |
-1
|
-1
|
NS | NS |
|
Disclosure on Relationships
Is the organization transparent about its involvement with industry associations that are influencing climate policy, including the extent to which it is aligned with these groups on climate? |
-1
|
NS |
1
|
NA | NA | NA | NS |
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior executives are chairs of the Working group on European research and innovation policy
Torsten Bardewyck and Dr. Markus Broich
Open PDF file of Data Source
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior executives are chairs of the Working group on European research and innovation policy
Torsten Bardewyck and Dr. Markus Broich
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Airbus Group is an indirect member of MEDEF through GIFAS
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Airbus Group senior executive is chairman of MEDEF member association
Marwan Lahoud (2017)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior Executive of Airbus Group was on the MEDEF Executive Committee (2016)
Marwan Lahoud
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Airbus Group is an indirect member of MEDEF through GIFAS
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Airbus Group senior executive is chairman of MEDEF member association
Marwan Lahoud (2017)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior Executive of Airbus Group was on the MEDEF Executive Committee (2016)
Marwan Lahoud
How to Read our Relationship Score Map
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.
Climate Lobbying Overview: Airbus appears to have mixed, and mostly negative, positioning with its climate policy engagement for aviation in 2019-21. Airbus appears to support global regulations for aviation, including the CORSIA offsetting scheme, while taking mixed or negative positions on more direct and stringent aviation climate policy at regional and national levels.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Airbus has stated support for the climate strategy of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), the UN aviation agency in its 2019 annual report. In a 2020 EU consultation response, Airbus further stated support for a “net-zero emissions aviation ecosystem in Europe by 2050”. However, comments from Airbus CEO, Guillaume Faury, in April 2021 suggested he was unsupportive of European climate-related government regulation, and in a speech in 2019 he suggested it was “unfair” that the aviation sector had been highlighted for its environmental impact as it is only “2% to 2.5% of CO2 emissions.”
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Airbus has communicated support for ICAO’s CORSIA offsetting scheme for aviation and the CO2 standard for aircraft in its 2019 Annual Report. In a 2020 US consultation response, Airbus appeared to qualify its support for the US certifying ICAO’s global CO2 standard for aircraft into domestic law on the condition that that “Airbus does not believe the EPA should impose rules that are different from, or in excess of” ICAO standards.
Airbus appears to have a mixed position regarding an EU sustainable aviation fuels blending mandate. In 2020, as part of the World Economic Forum’s Clean Skies for Tomorrow initiative, Airbus appeared to endorse a sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) blending mandate. However, while Airbus referenced a potential EU SAF blending mandate in an October 2020 EU consultation response, it appeared to take an unclear position on the policy, stressing that “there needs to a very close harmonisation with global policy and potential blending mandates”. In 2019, Airbus appeared to communicate opposition to an EU-wide carbon tax on aviation as part of an Airlines for Europe event.
Positioning on Energy Transition: In 2019-20 Airbus appears to have communicated general support for the electrification of aviation. In 2020, Airbus publicly supported decarbonizing aviation through the development of planes fueled by green hydrogen. In a 2020 op-ed by Airbus CEO, Guillaume Faury, seems to have emphasized aviation’s environmental benefits over rail, and stressed that the “expectations of what rail can achieve exceed the current reality” regarding travel in Europe compared to aviation. The Airbus CEO also appears to have supported an EU-wide fleet renewal scheme to subsidize the purchase of new aircraft in a 2020 interview. In a February 2021 presentation to the EU Commission Airbus similarly urged the EU to support a fleet renewal scheme as part of the EU green stimulus, further suggesting that such measures should be included in the EU Taxonomy.
Industry Association Governance: Airbus has provided a limited disclosure of its trade association members, of some of its trade association memberships on the Airbus website, with no further details on their climate positions, nor Airbus’ engagement with them, provided. Airbus has not published a review of its alignment with its industry associations. Airbus is a strategic partner of International Air Transport Association (IATA), which has actively and negatively lobbied climate regulation for aviation at global, regional, and national levels. Airbus is also a member of Airlines for Europe, which is actively lobbying against ambitious climate policy for aviation in Europe.