ConocoPhillips
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. . |
EU Register
Information provided by to the voluntary EU Transparency Register. |
|
Communication of Climate Science
Is the organization transparent and clear about its position on climate change science? |
0
|
0
|
NS | NS |
-1
|
2
|
NS | NA |
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
|
-1
|
NA | NS | NS |
0
|
NS | NA |
Supporting the Need for Regulations
To what extent does the organization express the need for regulatory intervention to resolve the climate crisis? |
0
|
-1
|
NA | NS |
-1
|
0
|
0
|
NA |
Support of UN Climate Process
Is the organization supporting the UN FCCC process on climate change? |
1
|
-1
|
NA | NS |
1
|
1
|
NS | NA |
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 | NA |
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
1
|
1
|
2
|
-2
|
0
|
0
|
NS | NA |
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
0
|
NS |
0
|
1
|
NS |
1
|
NS | NA |
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
|
NS | NS | NS | NS | NA |
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 | NS | NS | NS | NS | NA |
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 | NS |
-2
|
-1
|
NS | NA |
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 |
0
|
-1
|
0
|
0
|
-1
|
-1
|
NS | NA |
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? |
0
|
NS |
-1
|
NA | NA | NA | NS | NA |

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips is a member of US Chamber of Commerce.
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips no longer appears in the member list of the US-Turkey Business Council.
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips is a member of the US-Turkey Business Council

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior Executive of Conoco Phillips is on the Board of Directors of USCC
Andrew Lundquist

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips is a member of US Chamber of Commerce.
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips no longer appears in the member list of the US-Turkey Business Council.
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips is a member of the US-Turkey Business Council

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior Executive of Conoco Phillips is on the Board of Directors of USCC
Andrew Lundquist

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips is one of 82 members of IOGP.
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
No senior executive of Conoco Phillips on the management committee of IOGP.
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior Executive of Conoco Phillips is on the management committee of IOGP
Trond-Erik Johansen

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips is one of 82 members of IOGP.
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
No senior executive of Conoco Phillips on the management committee of IOGP.
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Senior Executive of Conoco Phillips is on the management committee of IOGP
Trond-Erik Johansen

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
ConocoPhilips CEO serves on the Executive Committee
Ryan Lance

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips CEO is chairman of API board of directors
Ryan Lance

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
ConocoPhilips CEO serves on the Executive Committee
Ryan Lance

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Conoco Phillips CEO is chairman of API board of directors
Ryan Lance

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
President of Australian branch of ConocoPhillips is on the board of APPEA.
Khoa Dao

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Executive of Australian branch of ConocoPhilips is on the board of APPEA (Aug 2020)
Nicholas McKenna

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Executive of Australian branch of ConocoPhilips is on the board of APPEA
Mr Nicholas McKenna

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
President of Australian branch of ConocoPhillips is on the board of APPEA.
Khoa Dao

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Executive of Australian branch of ConocoPhilips is on the board of APPEA (Aug 2020)
Nicholas McKenna

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
Executive of Australian branch of ConocoPhilips is on the board of APPEA
Mr Nicholas McKenna

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
ConocoPhillips is a member of QRC

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
A subsidiary of ConocoPhillips is a member of QRC
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
ConocoPhillips is a member of QRC

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
A subsidiary of ConocoPhillips is a member of QRC
not specified

InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
InfluenceMap Comment:
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: ConocoPhillips has improved its top-line communications on climate in recent years but continues to lobbying to promote the role of oil and gas in the energy mix. Furthermore, the company retains a network of high-level memberships to industry associations actively opposing climate policy.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: In 2019, ConocoPhillips stated support for large-scale action to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius. This follows ConocoPhillips calling on the U.S. to remain in the Paris Agreement in 2017, and again in 2020. ConocoPhillips’ position on climate science is ambiguous: the company states on its corporate website it 2020 that it recognizes human activity, including the burning of fossil fuels, contributes to increased greenhouse gases, which “can” lead to adverse changes in the global climate. It then goes onto say about the science: “While uncertainties remain, we continue to manage GHG emissions in our operations…”. Evidence suggests ConocoPhillips is suggesting the science is uncertain, however, its not completely clear if this is what the company means.
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: On ConocoPhillips’ 2020 'Public Policy Engagement' page on its corporate website, the company supports carbon pricing. In 2020, ConocoPhillips continues to support the Baker-Schultz Carbon Dividends Plan and is a member of the Climate Leadership Council, a group which pushes for a carbon dividend. However, ConocoPhillips' support for a carbon price comes at the expense of additional forms of policy, stating on its 2020 'Public Policy Engagement' disclosure that a carbon price should ‘result in some relief via the elimination of other laws and regulations’. In 2019, ConocoPhillips supported a carbon tax in the U.S which also proposed the removal of the Clean Power Plan.
The company has, in particular, previously lobbied against US methane regulations. This lobbying has included opposition to many of the requirements related to methane emissions implemented by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management before their repeal in 2018. ConocoPhillip’s has also supported the revisions of the US EPA’s emissions performance standards for oil and natural gas facilities to remove what it considered ‘unnecessary’ and ‘burdensome’ obligations to inspect and monitor fugitive emission leaks in 2017. In 2019, the company has pivoted to state that it supports some form of 'cost-effective' and 'fit-for-purpose' methane regulation, particularly in the absence of a carbon tax, however it is unclear what this means in practice.
Positioning on Energy Transition: ConocoPhillips does not appear to support transitioning the energy mix. In its 2020 Political Support Policies & Procedures statement, ConocoPhillips states that it uses grassroots advocacy to supplement the company's lobbying efforts 'by influencing officials to take favorable action on legislation or regulation important to the company.' ConocoPhillips has an advocacy website called 'Power in Cooperation' through which it promotes fracking, additional investment into oil and gas infrastructure, and the increased use of gas, stating it is 'good for the environment'. The 'Power in Cooperation' website also encouraged users to vote in the 2020 Election, stating 'Energy advocacy is powered by people, like you, in communities across the country who know their votes matter.' ConocoPhillips claims the lobbying achieved through this site was 'crucial in the repeal of the crude exports ban' on its public website in 2020.
Furthermore, in a communication from 2020, the company appears to advocate joining the Paris Agreement. However, this participation appears to be in order to encourage other participants to use emissions reduction technology and fuel-switching to US gas to reduce emissions. Additionally, it has been reported that ConocoPhillips lobbied the Bureau of Land Management in 2020 to remove the environmental impact criteria from regulation preventing the development of oil and gas in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge. In 2020 it has also been reported that ConocoPhillips has spent $11.2m lobbying the Department of the Interior since 2017 on approvals for fossil fuel projects.
Industry Association Governance: ConocoPhillips retains membership to several powerful trade associations actively opposing climate regulation in the US. These include the American Petroleum Institute, Western States Petroleum Association, [123 US Chamber of Commerce, Natural Gas Supply Association, National Association of Manufacturers, International Oil & Gas Producers Association, and Business Roundtable. In its 2020 Public Policy Engagement statement, ConocoPhillips reviewed its memberships and stated it was aligned on climate change positions with all these groups. This is with the exception of API's position on the direct federal regulation of methane, however, overall, ConocoPhillips maintains its alignment with API is consistent.