Boeing

InfluenceMap Score
for Climate Policy Engagement
D
Performance Band
52%
Organization Score
41%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Industrials
Head​quarters:
Chicago, United States
Brands and Associated Companies:
McDonnell Douglas, Hawker de Havilland Aerospace, Alteon Training
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Climate Lobbying Overview: Boeing appears to have mixed engagement with climate policy for the aviation sector in 2021-23. Boeing appears to support policies promoting sustainable aviation fuels but also retains memberships to several industry associations actively opposing stringent regulatory intervention on climate, including policy relating to international aviation.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Boeing stated support for the goals of the Paris Agreement in its 2022 sustainability report, while in its 2021 Annual Report, released in 2022, Boeing endorsed "our industry’s commitment to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050". Boeing further echoed this support in a August 2022 US consultation response and an October 2022 press release supported the adoption of a 2050 CO2 net-zero aspirational goal for international aviation at ICAO. In 2021, Boeing communicated top-line support for the International Civil Aviation Organization’s (ICAO) Carbon Offset and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation (CORSIA), under which airlines must buy offsets for emissions beyond average baseline emissions of 2019, and/or use ‘CORSIA eligible’ fuels (a voluntary scheme until 2027).

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: In 2021-23, Boeing has had mixed engagement with specific climate regulations in the EU and US. A February 2021 Reuters article suggested that Boeing had actively opposed legal efforts to increase the stringency of the CO2 standard for aircraft in the US from the EPA. An August 2022 Boeing consultation response appeared to support the FAA adopting ICAO-equivalent CO2 standards in the US while advocating against higher standards and opposing their application to military & modified in-service aircraft.

A May 2021 joint letter to policymakers, signed by Boeing, further stated support for a sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) blenders tax credit under the Sustainable Skies Act. Boeing’s 2022 CDP response further stated “support with minor exceptions” for US renewable energy policy, including a US SAF blenders tax credit and the Renewable Fuels Standard, however the exceptions supported are unclear. According to a November 2022 Arab News article, Boeing also supported incentives for green hydrogen and renewable fuels under the US Inflation Reduction Act. A February 2023 joint letter, signed by Boeing, further appeared to urge policymakers to support Washington’s proposed SAF blenders tax credit.

In it’s 2022 CDP response, Boeing appeared unsupportive of an emissions trading scheme under Washington State’s Climate Commitment Act, emphasizing competitiveness and carbon leakage concerns.

Regarding EU policy, a July 2021 Clean Skies for Tomorrow Insight Report, endorsed by Boeing, appeared to support an EU SAF mandate and a November 2021 EU consultation from Boeing Europe appeared to reiterate this support. Furthermore, an October 2022 press release, stated support for a “Sustainable Aviation Fund” under ReFuelEU Aviation, without expressing a clear position on SAF mandates under the policy. In the same press release, Boeing also appeared supportive of SAF allowances under the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, a provision with unclear emissions' reduction potential.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Boeing appears to have limited recent engagement on measures to decarbonize aviation, although it appears to broadly support policies that increase production of SAFs. In October 2021, Boeing published a joint letter with several other major aviation manufacturers, in which it broadly called for “appropriate regional policy mechanisms and positive incentives” that stimulate the production of SAFs and green hydrogen in the aviation sector. Similarly, Boeing’s Hydrogen Fact Sheet, released in February 2023, expressed support for SAFs in the short-term, with clear support for a switch to synthetic fuels and electric-and hydrogen-powered aircraft in the medium to long-term. A May 2022 Boeing Twitter post further appeared to support increased SAF use in response to high oil prices. A January 2023 Op-Ed in Fortune from Boeing's Chief Sustainability Officer, Chris Raymond, also appeared to promote increased SAF use globally, while being unclear about which types of fuels are supported or their sustainability criteria. However, in an October 2022 AviationWeek article, Raymond appeared to support weaker sustainability criteria for bio-based SAFs than enforced in the EU, stating that “we just need some level of sustainability criteria around those feedstocks”.

Industry Association Governance: Boeing publicly discloses a limited list of its memberships to industry associations on its website without disclosing its direct engagement with them on climate change, their climate policy positions, nor the company’s role within each association. Boeing has also not published a review of its alignment with its industry associations. Boeing remains a member of the National Association of Manufacturers and US Chamber of Commerce, both of which are actively lobbying against US climate policy. Boeing is also a strategic partner of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) which has consistently opposed ambitious climate policy for international aviation.

InfluenceMap collects and assesses evidence of corporate climate policy engagement on a weekly basis, depending on the availability of information from each specific data source (for more information see our methodology). While this analysis flows through to the company’s scores each week, the summary above is updated periodically. This summary was last updated in Q1 2023.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
1NSNSNSNSNSNS
12NS1NSNSNS
00NS01NSNS
111NSNSNSNS
-1NA0NANANANS
NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
NS0-1NS-2NSNS
NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
11000NSNS
00010-1NS
0NS0-1-1NSNS
0NS0NANANANS
NS1NSNS-1NSNS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
63%
 
63%
 
21%
 
21%
 
48%
 
48%
 
23%
 
23%
 
28%
 
28%
 
51%
 
51%
 
31%
 
31%
 
58%
 
58%
 
43%
 
43%
 
50%
 
50%
 
50%
 
50%
 
59%
 
59%

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.