HeidelbergCement

InfluenceMap Score
D+
Performance Band
57%
Organisation Score
51%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Construction Materials
Head​quarters:
Heidelberg, Germany
Official Web Site:

Climate Lobbying Overview: HeidelbergCement seems to have mixed positions on climate change policy and is strategically engaged. The company appears to have become less oppositional to climate policy over time, taking more supportive positions on top-line climate ambition and the energy transition. However, it continues to advocate against increasing the ambition of several key climate regulations in the EU such as the EU Emissions Trading System.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: HeidelbergCement appears to be broadly supportive of climate action in its top-line messaging on climate policy. In a review of industry association alignment in December 2021, the company supported pursuing efforts to limit warming to 1.5°C. In the same publication, HeidelbergCement seemed to support government policy to respond to climate change, but has consistently stressed preference for a global framework and global level playing field conditions. In a meeting with EU Commissioner Breton in March 2021, sourced from a Freedom of Information Request, the company advocated for the need for a combination of ‘push’ and ‘pull’ measures, such as incentives and standardization, in the Fit for 55 package and close coordination with the Industrial Policy at EU and national levels. In its 2021 CDP Climate Change Disclosure, the organization supported the UN Paris Agreement.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: HeidelbergCement appears to engage on climate change regulation with predominantly negative positions. On its corporate website, accessed in January 2022, the company supported the EU Commission’s proposed reforms to the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), but also advocated for the continuation of the free allocation of emissions allowances to protect against carbon leakage, a position which is misaligned with the EU Commission. In its 2021 CDP Disclosure, HeidelbergCement suggested that changes to existing carbon leakage protection should only happen gradually. In a July 2021 earnings call, the Chairman Domink von Achten suggested that the free allocation of emissions allowances in the EU ETS could begin to be phased out once the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) became fully effective, a position which is misaligned with the EU Commission’s proposal.

In its 2020 CDP Disclosure, the company stated support for EU energy efficiency targets. However, in the same 2020 CDP Disclosure, it seemed to advocate for compensation and/or exemptions for heavy industry from costs resulting from renewable energy legislation. However, in its 2021 CDP Disclosure, it supported policies to scale up renewable energy production. On its corporate website, accessed in January 2022, HeidelbergCement advocated for product standards and procurement schemes for low-emission building materials.

Positioning on Energy Transition: HeidelbergCement appears to broadly support the energy transition. In its industry association review in December 2021, the company supported increased renewable energy in the energy mix. However, it also advocated for hydrogen produced with any fuel in the short-term with green hydrogen production as a long-term goal in the review. HeidelbergCement was supportive of alternative fuels to replace fossil fuels in the cement production process, including non-recyclable waste and biomass, on its corporate website, accessed in January 2022. The CEO Dominik von Achten supported the US Infrastructure Bill to invest in climate-friendly infrastructure in a March 2021 earnings call.

Industry Association Governance: HeidelbergCement published a detailed review of its alignment with industry associations in December 2021, but did not disclose all of the memberships it retains, such as the Confederación Española de Organizaciones Empresariales (CEOE). The company retains positions on the boards of several industry associations which are lobbying negatively on climate policy, including CEMBUREAU, the Federation of German Industries (BDI) and the Confederación Española de Organizaciones Empresariales (CEOE).

A detailed assessment of the company's industry association review can be found on our CA100+ platform here.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
-1NSNSNSNSNSNS
12NSNS01NS
0NS0110NS
111NS10NS
0NA-1NANANANS
0NSNSNS00NS
0NS-1-1-1-1-1
NSNS1NSNSNSNS
NSNS0NSNSNSNS
010111NS
1NSNSNSNS0NS
1NS1NANANANS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
54%
 
54%
 
56%
 
56%
 
46%
 
46%
 
49%
 
49%
 
36%
 
36%
 
49%
 
49%
 
69%
 
69%
 
57%
 
57%
 
52%
 
52%
 
44%
 
44%
 
46%
 
46%
 
75%
 
75%
 
53%
 
53%
 
36%
 
36%
 
48%
 
48%

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.