Ameriprise Financial

InfluenceMap Score
for Sustainable Finance
D-
Performance Band
58%
Organisation Score
45%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Financials
Head​quarters:
Minneapolis, United States
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Sustainable Finance Lobbying Overview: Ameriprise Financial appears to have had limited engagement on sustainable finance policy, with mixed positions on sustainable finance broadly.

Top-Line Messaging on Sustainable Finance Policy: Ameriprise Financial has recognized the risks climate change poses to the financial system but it is unclear whether it supports systemic reforms to address these risks. Columbia Threadneedle, Ameriprise Financial’s asset management arm, has supported urgent action to tackle climate change and in 2021 signed onto the Net Zero Asset Managers Initiative, signaling support for the goal of net zero by 2050. In its 2022 CDP Response, Ameriprise Financial appeared to support the goals of the Paris Agreement. In its 2022 Responsible Business Report, Ameriprise Financial stated that it was an “active industry participant in climate topics”, but details of its engagement on specific sustainable finance policies are unclear. In a 2018 newsletter, Columbia Threadneedle opposed the EU's sustainable finance action plan, arguing that it was "disproportionate and costly" and that policy should focus on changes at the level of the real economy. However, in a 2021 newsletter, Columbia Threadneedle appeared to support the Biden administration’s action on sustainable finance. Columbia Threadneedle’s positions on and engagement with specific policies, however, are unclear.

Position on Regulated Corporate ESG disclosure: In a 2021 newsletter, Columbia Threadneedle stated support for regulation that strengthens corporate ESG disclosure. Ameriprise Financial’s Q1 2022 Lobbying Report shows engagement on the US Climate Risk Disclosure Act of 2021, but details of this engagement are unclear.

Position on Taxonomies and ESG Standards/Labels/Benchmarks: Columbia Threadneedle has taken mixed positions on the EU’s taxonomy. In 2019, it was reported that Columbia Threadneedle's global head of responsible investment opposed the EU taxonomy, arguing that it would "create more confusion than it will actually solve." However, a tweet by Columbia Threadneedle in January 2020 and a June 2021 Columbia Threadneedle insights paper both appeared to be broadly supportive of the taxonomy. A Q4 2021 Columbia Threadneedle Responsible Investment report appears supportive of the EU Taxonomy but a Q2 2022 report takes a more mixed position, calling the draft criteria “narrowly defined” but supporting the increased investment in sustainable technologies that would result from the policy. In its Q4 2021 report, Columbia Threadneedle appears to support the German financial supervisory authority’s efforts to establish ESG labeling rules, but an insights paper from December 2022 appears unsupportive of regulations on ESG fund labels.

Industry Association Governance: Ameriprise Financial and Columbia Threadneedle have disclosed the majority of their trade association memberships but have given few details on the sustainable finance positions of these groups or any actions taken to address misalignment.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
0NSNSNSNSNSNS
111NS1NSNS
0NSNSNSNSNS0
0NSNSNSNSNSNS
01NSNS-2NSNS
1-1NSNSNSNSNS
1NSNSNSNSNSNS
NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
-1NANANANANANA
-1NANANANANANA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
56%
 
56%
 
52%
 
52%
 
43%
 
43%
 
42%
 
42%
 
15%
 
15%
 
30%
 
30%
 
81%
 
81%

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.