We have expanded the list of climate policies we assess company engagement with to incorporate land-use related policy, referring to legislative or regulatory measures to enhance and protect ecosystems and land where carbon is being stored. Assessments under this category are currently underweighted in terms of their contribution to the overall company metrics. This weighting will be progressively increased over the next 6 months.
We adjusted the terminology used to describe the queries running down the left-hand side of our scoring matrix and added additional explanatory text to the info-boxes. This has no impact on the scores and methodology. It has been done following user feedback to improve clarity.
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.
Open PDF file of Data Source
Climate Lobbying Overview: Insurance Group Australia (IAG) appear to be broadly positive in its top-line messaging on climate change, however, its engagement with government level regulations appears to be limited and the company does not appear take a clear stance on the future energy mix.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: IAG appears to be broadly positive on climate policy through its top-line messaging. It clearly supports the science of climate change in its FY2021 Annual Review and Safer Communities Report. In its 2021 Annual Report, the company voiced support for the Paris Agreement and its 1.5°C objective. IAG also appears to have a positive stance towards government regulation to respond to climate change in a statement reported by the Business Insurance Australia in June 2021.
Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: IAG does not appear to have a significant engagement with climate-related regulations. However, in 2017, IAG commented on the climate policy review in which it called for ‘robust and progressive action by the government on reducing emissions’ but stated a market-based approach would be its preferred option. In 2019, it again appeared to support the need for government regulations by stating ‘clear, consistent, bipartisan policy is required to minimise risks of transition to a low carbon economy.’ Also in its comments on the 2017 climate change policy review, IAG stated how it does not support the use of international credits in any emission trading scheme while also stating that the then-current policy suite was inadequate to deliver Australia's climate ambitions.
Positioning on Energy Transition: IAG does not appear to comment on the energy transition or the future energy mix.
Industry Association Governance: IAG does not appear to disclose its memberships to industry associations through its corporate website, although it is disclosed through its 2020 CDP climate change disclosure. However, this disclosure omits IAG’s membership to the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, an industry association that traditionally lobbies negatively on climate change policy.