J.P. Morgan

InfluenceMap Score
D
Performance Band
56%
Organisation Score
47%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Financials
Head​quarters:
New York, United States
Brands and Associated Companies:
J.P. Morgan, J.P. Morgan Asset Management, Chase
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Sustainable Finance Lobbying Overview: JPMorgan Chase (JPMorgan) appears to have had limited engagement on sustainable finance policy, but, where it has engaged, appears not to have supported stringent regulatory intervention despite some top-line statements of support. A significant amount of JPMorgan’s position-taking emerges via its asset management arm, JPMorgan Asset Management.

Top-line Messaging on Sustainable Finance Policy: JPMorgan has stated support for the goals of the Paris Agreement and in October 2021 joined the Net Zero Banking Alliance, supporting the goal of net zero by 2050. However, JPMorgan appears to support a less stringent climate response than the IPCC, supporting continued investment in oil and gas. In October 2021, JPMorgan’s head of ESG for EMEA suggested that oil and gas companies were “part of the solution” to climate change. CEO Jamie Dimon has stated support for accelerating the transition to a low carbon economy but has also advocated for a continued role for oil and gas. In his letter to shareholders in 2022, Dimon argued that for the purposes of energy security the US must increase oil and gas production, asserting that this increased production would not conflict with long-term climate goals. Dimon also directly advocated for the Biden Administration to scale up investments in the US fossil fuel sector in the midst of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. JPMorgan Asset Management has described engaging with regulators on sustainable finance policies and has stated support for “the healthy growth of ESG implementation.”

Position on Regulated Corporate ESG Disclosure: JPMorgan Asset Management has voiced some support for regulated corporate ESG disclosure, contrasting with JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon’s stated opposition to mandated climate reporting. In an interview with ESG Investor in 2021, Global Head of Sustainable Investing Jennifer Wu stated support for mandatory climate disclosures, and in an interview with ESG Clarity in August 2022, APAC Lead Sustainable Investing Strategist Tomomi Shimada stated support for mandatory corporate ESG disclosures in Asia. A 2021 paper on JPMorgan Asset Management’s website suggests support for moves toward regulated corporate ESG disclosure in China.

Position on Taxonomies: In a 2018 media article, JPMorgan Asset Management appeared to support an EU taxonomy with major exceptions, arguing for the prioritization of client choice over a stringent consideration of ESG factors.

Position on ESG Labels/Standards/Benchmarks: In comments to the SEC in 2022, JPMorgan Asset Management supported the introduction of three ESG-related fund categories, and supported extending the Commission’s “Names Rule” to funds with ESG-related terms in their names but requested that the Rule’s 80% investment compliance be tested less frequently than proposed.

Position on Integrating ESG into Investor Duties: In a 2021 paper JPMorgan Asset Management appeared to support the EU’s Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR). In 2022 comments on the SEC’s proposed disclosure requirements for investment advisers and investment companies on ESG investment practices, JPMorgan Asset Management broadly supported the proposal but recommended a summary approach to disclosure rather than the detailed draft requirements, and recommended that funds not be required to disclose Scope 3 emissions.

Position on Integrating ESG into Risk Management/Prudential Regulation: In a 2021 paper JPMorgan Asset Management appeared to support the European Commission’s proposal to apply climate stress scenarios to insurers’ balance sheets.

Industry Association Governance: JPMorgan Asset Management has detailed some of the sustainable finance policies it is tracking with some level of detail on desired outcome, but no detail on efforts to influence outcome. JPMorgan lacks such disclosure. JPMorgan has disclosed memberships to US trade associations but has not given details on the sustainable finance policy positions of these organizations. The disclosure is also missing Europe-based memberships such as EFAMA and PensionsEurope.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
0NSNSNSNSNSNS
1NSNS-1-1-1NS
0NSNSNSNSNSNS
1NSNSNS1-1NS
0NSNSNS-1NSNS
NSNSNS0NSNSNS
1NSNS0NSNSNS
1NSNSNSNSNSNS
-2NANANANANANA
0NANANANANANA
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
39%
 
39%
 
42%
 
42%
 
58%
 
58%
 
48%
 
48%
 
55%
 
55%
 
37%
 
37%
 
41%
 
41%
 
56%
 
56%
 
56%
 
56%
 
42%
 
42%
 
11%
 
11%
 
49%
 
49%
 
52%
 
52%
 
32%
 
32%
 
59%
 
59%
 
48%
 
48%
 
43%
 
43%
 
81%
 
81%

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.