Deutsche Bank

InfluenceMap Score
C-
Performance Band
64%
Organisation Score
51%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Financials
Head​quarters:
Frankfurt, Germany
Brands and Associated Companies:
DWS
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Deutsche Bank has had mostly positive engagement on sustainable finance policy, with a significant proportion of engagement from asset management subsidiary DWS. DWS has stated support for the EU's 2050 net-zero target, and Deutsche Bank has generally supported action by the financial sector on climate. However, in 2021, Deutsche Bank argued against Germany's earlier net-zero commitment by 2045 and for a continued role for GHG emissions intense investments.

Deutsche Bank has stated broad support for the EU's Action Plan on Sustainable Finance on its websites and its 2020 CDP response it encouraged policy that drives positive action but without a clear position on whether to restrict negative action (i.e. fossil-fuel energy investments).

Also in its 2020 CDP response, Deutsche Bank supported regulated corporate ESG disclosure and in a website article in 2021 further supported policy to improve regulated corporate ESG disclosure, including regulatory implementation of Scope 3 emissions. In a 2019 whitepaper, DWS stated support for mandatory corporate disclosure in line with the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations. Likewise, in a 2021 letter to the SEC, Deutsche Bank stated support for a regulated corporate ESG disclosure framework. In 2021, it also stated support for an ambitious global sustainability reporting in response to the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB), which is likely to inform government policy

Deutsche Bank has generally been very supportive of the taxonomy in website articles, consultations and in the media. However, a 2019 DWS whitepaper argued that regulatory requirements based on the taxonomy should be voluntary. In feedback to the European Commission's consultation on the Renewed Sustainable Finance Strategy in 2020, Deutsche Bank supported the EU taxonomy, particularly its use by the public sector but opposed its expansion to cover environmentally harmful activities.

In a 2019 whitepaper, DWS stated support for an EU Green Bond Standard and supported the EU's climate benchmarks with some minor concerns around the methodology used. In feedback to the Commission consultation on the Renewed Sustainable Finance Strategy in 2020, Deutsche Bank supported the need for verification of the EU Green Bond Standard, as well as the Commission’s suggestions for new ESG labels and benchmark. However, it has argued for a less prescriptive approach to the EU Ecolabel.

Between 2018-2020, DWS has also stated support for the EU's work to integrate ESG considerations into fiduciary duty in website posts and whitepapers. In 2020, Deutsche Bank supported considering adverse sustainability impacts as part of fiduciary duty, although suggested a flexible approach to how retail clients are asked about their sustainability preferences.

DWS has stated some policy positions in whitepapers, but there does not appear to be a centralized disclosure of lobbying activities or any group level disclosure, with positions scattered throughout various website articles. Deutsche Bank has disclosed some of its trade association memberships, but has not given any further details of its governance of indirect influence. DWS has also listed trade group memberships on its website with some details on working groups it is involved in.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
0NS00NSNSNS
01NSNS21NS
11011NSNS
1110NSNSNS
1NS001NSNS
1NSNS0NSNSNS
1NSNS0NSNSNS
1NSNSNSNSNSNS
-1NANANANANANA
-1NANANANANANA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
49%
 
49%
 
41%
 
41%
 
42%
 
42%
 
48%
 
48%
 
55%
 
55%
 
52%
 
52%
 
81%
 
81%
 
56%
 
56%
 
48%
 
48%
 
49%
 
49%
 
43%
 
43%

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.