BHP
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? |
2
|
1
|
NA |
2
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
|
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) |
1
|
1
|
NA |
-1
|
2
|
1
|
0
|
|
Supporting the Need for Regulations
To what extent does the organization express the need for regulatory intervention to resolve the climate crisis? |
0
|
NS | NA |
-1
|
NS | NS | NS |
|
Support of UN Climate Process
Is the organization supporting the UN FCCC process on climate change? |
2
|
1
|
NS |
1
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
|
Transparency on Legislation
Is the organisation transparent about its positions on climate change legislation/policy and its activities to influence it? |
0
|
NA |
1
|
NA | NA | NA | NS |
|
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
0
|
NS |
0
|
-1
|
-2
|
0
|
NS |
|
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
0
|
NS |
0
|
NS |
1
|
NS |
1
|
|
Energy and Resource Efficiency
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: energy efficiency policy, standards, and targets |
NS | NS |
1
|
-1
|
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 | NS | NS |
-2
|
-2
|
-2
|
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? |
0
|
0
|
-1
|
-1
|
-1
|
0
|
-1
|
|
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 |
1
|
1
|
NS |
-1
|
-1
|
0
|
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:
BHP is a direct member of the Instituto Brasileiro de Petróleo e Gás and participates in one of its boards
Adam Goss
Open PDF file of Data Source
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a direct member of the Instituto Brasileiro de Petróleo e Gás and participates in one of its boards
Adam Goss
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Exec is char of Safety Committee
David Jenkins
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton is a direct member of IOGP
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Exec is char of Safety Committee
David Jenkins
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton is a direct member of IOGP
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
In June 2020, MCA updated its position on climate change to provide explicit support for the Paris Agreement and its goals. Accordingly, BHP no longer identifies material difference with the MCA.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP stated in it's 2019 review that it was mostly but not fully aligned with the MCA on climate and energy policy issues.
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Edgar Basto, President Minerals Australia at BHP, sits on the Board of the MCA.
Edgar Basto
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Mike Henry sits on the board of directors of MCA.
Mike Henry
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP identified material differences with the MCA on climate policy issues but concluded it would remain a member due to the high level of benefit it received through membership but would review its membership in 12 months if the MCA did not refrain from policy activity and advocacy in these areas.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Mike Henry, President Operations, Minerals Australia, sits on the MCA board of directors
Mike Henry
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
In June 2020, MCA updated its position on climate change to provide explicit support for the Paris Agreement and its goals. Accordingly, BHP no longer identifies material difference with the MCA.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP stated in it's 2019 review that it was mostly but not fully aligned with the MCA on climate and energy policy issues.
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Edgar Basto, President Minerals Australia at BHP, sits on the Board of the MCA.
Edgar Basto
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Mike Henry sits on the board of directors of MCA.
Mike Henry
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP identified material differences with the MCA on climate policy issues but concluded it would remain a member due to the high level of benefit it received through membership but would review its membership in 12 months if the MCA did not refrain from policy activity and advocacy in these areas.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Mike Henry, President Operations, Minerals Australia, sits on the MCA board of directors
Mike Henry
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior Exec. of BHP is on the board of APPEA (Aug 2020)
Graham Salmond
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Member of the board of directors
Graham Salmond
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
A subsidiary of BHP is a member of APPEA
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
A senior executive of a subsidiary of BHP Billiton is on the board of APPEA
Mr Graham Salmond
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior Exec. of BHP is on the board of APPEA (Aug 2020)
Graham Salmond
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Member of the board of directors
Graham Salmond
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
A subsidiary of BHP is a member of APPEA
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
A senior executive of a subsidiary of BHP Billiton is on the board of APPEA
Mr Graham Salmond
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP stated in its 2019 industry association review that it is 'partially aligned' with MAC on climate change. In a 2020 update, BHP appeared to suggest it has resolved these differences following MAC's explicit support for the Paris Agreement.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Executive is on the Board of Directors
Sara Harrison
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior executive BHP Billiton is on the board of MAC
Christopher Ryder
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP stated in its 2019 industry association review that it is 'partially aligned' with MAC on climate change. In a 2020 update, BHP appeared to suggest it has resolved these differences following MAC's explicit support for the Paris Agreement.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Executive is on the Board of Directors
Sara Harrison
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior executive BHP Billiton is on the board of MAC
Christopher Ryder
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is one of 24 direct members of AIGN. BHP's Practice Lead on Climate Change is on the executive at AIGN.
Graham Winkelman
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is one of 24 direct members of AIGN. BHP's Practice Lead on Climate Change is on the executive at AIGN.
Graham Winkelman
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a member of ICC.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton CEO is a Member of the ICC G20 CEO Advisory Group
Andrew Mackenzie
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a member of ICC.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton CEO is a Member of the ICC G20 CEO Advisory Group
Andrew Mackenzie
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Evidence suggests BHP is a member of the Energy and Climate Change Committee
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a member of BCA; BCA no longer discloses who sits on its various committees
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Mike Henry President Operations, Minerals Australia, sits on the Business Council of Australia's, Energy and Climate Change Committee.
Mike Henry
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billington is a direct member of BCA
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Evidence suggests BHP is a member of the Energy and Climate Change Committee
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a member of BCA; BCA no longer discloses who sits on its various committees
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Mike Henry President Operations, Minerals Australia, sits on the Business Council of Australia's, Energy and Climate Change Committee.
Mike Henry
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billington is a direct member of BCA
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior executive of BHP is in SACOME Council.
Justin Bauer
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a sponsoring member of SACOME. Laura Tyler, Chief of Geoscience and Asset President, Olympic Dam, sits on SACOME's Council.
Laura Tyler, Chief of Geoscience and Asset President, Olympic Dam
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior executive of BHP is in SACOME Council.
Justin Bauer
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a sponsoring member of SACOME. Laura Tyler, Chief of Geoscience and Asset President, Olympic Dam, sits on SACOME's Council.
Laura Tyler, Chief of Geoscience and Asset President, Olympic Dam
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
In an update on the 2019 Industry Association Review, BHP has deemed NSWMC to now be aligned with BHP's position on climate
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP has stated that there is a "material difference" between it's position and NSW Minerals Council's position on climate policy; however it elected to remain a member of the group as of April 2020.
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a direct member of the NSW Minerals Council
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
In an update on the 2019 Industry Association Review, BHP has deemed NSWMC to now be aligned with BHP's position on climate
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP has stated that there is a "material difference" between it's position and NSW Minerals Council's position on climate policy; however it elected to remain a member of the group as of April 2020.
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a direct member of the NSW Minerals Council
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton is a member of NPC.
not specified
Open PDF file of Data Source
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
President of BHP Billington is a Member
Stephen Pastor
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton is a member of NPC.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
President of BHP Billington is a Member
Stephen Pastor
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a member of US Chamber of Commerce. In its 2019 industry associations review, BHP identifies material differences in policy areas of Emissions Reductions Targets and Price on Carton with the Chamber. In a 2020 update, BHP reviewed its alignment and found that US Chamber were making steps to improve their advocacy so it would remain a member and engage.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP has reviewed its membership of the US Chamber, identifying material differences. BHP has concluded that, despite these differences, they will not leave the Chamber but engage with them on climate and energy issues. BHP has followingly joined the US Chamber's Energy and Environment Committee
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton is a member of the US Chamber
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP is a member of US Chamber of Commerce. In its 2019 industry associations review, BHP identifies material differences in policy areas of Emissions Reductions Targets and Price on Carton with the Chamber. In a 2020 update, BHP reviewed its alignment and found that US Chamber were making steps to improve their advocacy so it would remain a member and engage.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP has reviewed its membership of the US Chamber, identifying material differences. BHP has concluded that, despite these differences, they will not leave the Chamber but engage with them on climate and energy issues. BHP has followingly joined the US Chamber's Energy and Environment Committee
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton is a member of the US Chamber
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
In its 2019 Industry Associations Review, BHP identifies material differences with API in climate and energy policy. In a 2020 update, BHP appeared to suggest that these differences remain but it will continue membership and engage with API.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton is a Direct Member
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
In its 2019 Industry Associations Review, BHP identifies material differences with API in climate and energy policy. In a 2020 update, BHP appeared to suggest that these differences remain but it will continue membership and engage with API.
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
BHP Billiton is a Direct Member
not specified
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: BHP has consistently communicated top-line support for the Paris Agreement and policy action on climate change between 2017-2020. At a more detailed level, however, BHP appears to have lobbied to undermine and weaken ambitious climate policy, including greenhouse gas emissions regulations. At the same time, the company remains a member to many highly oppositional trade groups including the Minerals Council of Australia.
Top-line Messaging about Climate Policy: In its 2020 Global Climate Policy Standards, BHP expressed support for a ‘well below 2°C’ scenario and the need for urgent action on climate change. In the same document, the company appeared to retract its previous support for the use of Kyoto carryover credits to meet Australia’s commitments under the Paris Agreement. In September 2020, the company stated on its website that it believed the world must ‘pursue the Paris Agreement goals with increased levels of national and global ambition’.
The company's 2020 disclosures also state support for a technology-neutral policy framework that includes a "complementary set of measures" focusing on a price on carbon, support for low-emissions technology, and measures to build climate resilience. This position has been reaffirmed in messaging from the group's leadership in 2019. However, in consultations submitted to Australian policymakers on climate-motivated policy in 2018 and 2019, BHP has stressed that "Government intervention should be limited to where required to address demonstrated market failure."
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: In contrast to its top line messaging, at a more detailed level, communications from BHP appear to undermine ambitious climate policy. BHP appears to have lobbied negatively on GHG emissions standards in Australia. In 2018, the company supported weakening the Safeguard Mechanism through supporting production-based, annually updated emissions baselines, which would reduce overall emissions reduction. In 2019, BHP did not support the Western Australian EPA’s greenhouse gas assessment guidance, cautioning that state-based policy should align with weaker national emissions reduction targets and arguing the guidance should be flexible rather than prescriptive.
BHP has also lobbied against legislation to support the growth of renewable energy in Australia, advocating in 2017 for a repeal of state-based Australian renewables targets and not supporting post-2020 national renewables targets. In 2020, while BHP has not lobbied positively on renewable energy policies, its Global Climate Standards Policy specified that its lobby groups should not advocate against policies regarding the deployment of renewable energy.
Positioning on Energy Transition: BHP appears to have a mixed position on the energy mix, as it appears to support low-emissions technology as well as a continued and significant role for fossil fuels. In 2020, BHP stated support for policies that ‘aim to support the development and deployment of pre-commercial low emissions technologies’. However, this support appears to be on the condition that policies are technology and commodity neutral. Additionally, at the 2019 Financial Times Climate for Change conference, CEO Mike Henry appeared to criticize electrification and renewables using arguments about full-cycle carbon footprints in support of a technology-neutral ‘all of the above’ approach. BHP appears to support a significant and continued role for fossil fuels in the energy mix going forward, including deepwater oil and advantaged gas in 2019. BHP also appears to support a decreasing yet continued role for coal, calling for a ’balanced’ and ‘gradual’ move towards different energy sources in March 2019.
Industry Association Governance: BHP has disclosed regular reviews of its industry association memberships since 2017. The first review concluded there were material differences between its position on climate and the World Coal Association, resulting in BHP quitting the group in April 2018. However, while BHP also found material differences with highly oppositional lobby groups, including US Chamber of Commerce and Minerals Council of Australia, it has elected to retain its memberships and directly engage these groups on their climate and energy policy positions. BHP’s 2020 review also outlined detailed actions to be taken at four ‘partly aligned’ associations: American Petroleum Institute, Mining Association of Canada, NSW Minerals Council, and US Chamber of Commerce. However, BHP retains membership to these organizations as well as other highly oppositional groups including Australian Petroleum Production and Exploration Association, Australian Industry Greenhouse Network, Minerals Council of Australia).
In October 2020, BHP also suspended its membership to the Queensland Resources Council in response to an anti-Greens advertising campaign in the run-up to the state election.
A detailed assessment of the company's industry association review can be found on our CA100+ webpage here.