Dow Chemical

InfluenceMap Score
D
Performance Band
51%
Organisation Score
46%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Chemicals
Head​quarters:
Midland, United States
Brands and Associated Companies:
Dow AgroSciences, Union Carbide, Rohm and Haas, ANGUS Chemical Company
Official Web Site:

Climate Lobbying Overview: Dow Chemical (Dow) appears to have mixed positions on climate change policy, with highly active engagement. Dow’s top-line positions have become more positive over the past few years, although the company’s engagement with the energy transition remains largely negative. In addition, Dow retains memberships to industry associations which lobby negatively on climate change policy and holds powerful positions within several of these groups.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Dow has broadly positive top-line messaging on climate policy. Dow appears to support emissions reductions consistent with IPCC demands, stating support for limiting temperature increase to 1.5°C or well below 2°C in its 2021 ESG Report, released in June 2022. In the same report, Dow stated support for the Paris Agreement and in a C2ES Joint Letter to Congress in July 2021. In May 2021, Dow participated in a Ceres coalition calling for a US infrastructure package that included climate provisions. The company stated support for carbon pricing in a December 2021 blog post and contributed funds to the Alliance for Market Solutions, which lobbied US Congress in support of carbon pricing at the expense of other regulations as reported by Politico in May 2021. In January 2021, Dow CEO Jim Fitterling advocated for “durable policies and investments” and a carbon pricing policy in the US to respond to climate change.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Dow has mixed engagement with climate regulations and legislation. The company does not disclose any climate policy positions on its corporate website as of October 2022. In 2021-22 Lobbying Disclosure reports, Dow lists engagement on key US policies including the Inflation Reduction Act, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the CLEAN Future Act, which would set a GHG emissions reduction target in the US, and the Methane Emissions Reduction Act of 2021, which would levy a fee on methane emissions. However, it has not disclosed its position on any of these policies.

In its 2021 CDP Disclosure, the company stated support for emissions trading, but conditioned that support on the emissions trading overriding state climate programs and protection of global competitiveness. Dow CEO Jim Fitterling penned an October 2021 opinion piece in the Hill in support of a voluntary US emissions trading program, and in January 2021 Fitterling advocated for an emissions trading system in the US as an effective policy to reduce carbon emissions on Dow’s corporate blog. However, in an open letter from June 2022, Dow did not support the EU Parliament’s Environment Committee proposal to increase the ambition of the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment mechanism and the Emissions Trading System. In a February 2021 joint email to EU Vice President Timmermans, sourced via a freedom of information (FOI) request, Dow opposed a national carbon tax in the Netherlands, strongly advocating that action should be taken at the European level instead of national level.

In March 2021, Dow also supported Texas Senate Bill 1278, which would impose costs on renewable energy generation. However, in that same month, Dow served as a supportive witness for Texas SB398, which would facilitate solar energy generation.

Positioning on Energy Transition: The company has shown broad support for the energy transition, including in a May 2021 Ceres press release and in a September 2021 Call to Action for Shipping Decarbonization. However, Dow has mainly negative engagement on specific energy transition policies and issues.

In March 2022, Dow CEO Jim Fitterling did not support an urgent energy transition in his keynote speech to an American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturer’s conference, stating, “We need an all-of-the-above energy policy. We are constantly being cornered into one definition of clean energy and it just doesn’t work.” Dow tweeted in April 2021 a statement supporting an increase in fossil gas infrastructure without clarifying conditions related to methane abatement and carbon capture. In March 2021, a representative of Dow served as a witness for Texas House Bill 17, which would prevent local authorities from limiting any type of energy in the construction of buildings or infrastructure. These bills are increasingly common in US states, and appear to be a reactionary measure to municipal bans on fossil gas infrastructure. In the same month, the company supported Texas Senate Bill 1202, which would make the owning and operation of EV charging stations easier in the state.

Industry Association Governance: Dow is a member of several industry associations which take negative positions on climate change policy, including the American Petroleum Institute. The company is on the board of several associations negatively lobbying on climate policy, such as American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers, and the CEO of Dow is Chair of the National Association of Manufacturers as well as a Board Member of the Business Roundtable. The company is also a member of the US Chamber of Commerce, where a Dow executive sits on the Board of Directors. Dow discloses a list of its memberships on its corporate website accessed in October 2022, but does not disclose its climate policy positions nor how it influences the climate policy positions of these groups. The company has not published a formal review of its alignment with industry associations as of October 2022.

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 Q4 2022.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
22NSNS21NS
12NSNSNS1NS
01NSNS01NS
11NSNS22NS
-2NA-1NANANANS
NS-1NS-2NSNSNS
-100NS-11NS
111-22NSNS
-11002-1NS
11-1010-2
020NS01NS
0NS-1NANANANS
NS0NSNSNSNSNS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
29%
 
29%
 
57%
 
57%
 
29%
 
29%
 
52%
 
52%
 
20%
 
20%
 
63%
 
63%
 
23%
 
23%
 
55%
 
55%
 
62%
 
62%
 
50%
 
50%
 
54%
 
54%
 
50%
 
50%
 
71%
 
71%
 
45%
 
45%
 
67%
 
67%
 
47%
 
47%
 
35%
 
35%

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.