Orica

InfluenceMap Score
D+
Performance Band
56%
Organisation Score
45%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Industrials
Head​quarters:
Melbourne, Australia
Brands and Associated Companies:
GroundProbe Pty Ltd., Nelson Brothers Mining Services, Minova Bohemia S.R.O.
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Climate Lobbying Overview: Orica appears to have mixed engagement on climate policy, albeit limited. The company's top-line messaging appears to be broadly positive, but the company continues to support a sustained role for fossil fuels contrary to IPCC guidance. Orica is also a member of key Australian industry associations engaging negatively on climate policy.

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: Orica appears to have broadly positive top-line communications on climate policy. In December 2021, Orica published its first Climate Action Report in which it supported the global response to pursue efforts to limit temperature rise to 1.5° Celsius, also supporting action “in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement”. However, while Orica stated support for "government frameworks, supportive regulation and financial incentives" in its 2021 Climate Action Report, it also highlighted the need to maintain global competitiveness and prevent carbon leakage.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: Orica appears to have limited, mixed engagement with climate-related regulations, focusing recent engagement on carbon pricing policies. Orica’s 2021 CDP response highlights how the company advocated for the consideration for carbon leakage and competitiveness in Alberta’s new emissions trading system, the Technology Innovation and Emissions Reduction System (TIER), a position which is unlikely to support a high ambition policy. In its 2021 Climate Action Report, the company adopted an unclear position on the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), advocating that it should be “non-discriminatory” while acknowledging that carbon border adjustments “could be ... an effective global climate policy framework to help enable stronger emissions reduction policies”. However, in its 2020 Sustainability Report, Orica advocated for the use of ‘open and transparent’ international carbon markets.

Positioning on Energy Transition: Orica does not appear fully supportive of the energy transition. In its 2021 Climate Action Report, the company stated support for a “managed transition for the energy sector towards low emissions generation, while balancing the needs of energy security, affordability and emissions reduction”. Orica appears to have repeatedly supported a long term role for fossil gas in the energy mix, reportedly praising the Australian government’s “gas-led” economic recovery in the Sydney Morning Herald in March 2021. This follows comments from former CEO in 2020, Alberto Calderon, who reportedly stated he supported '100%' the Morrison governments ‘gas-fired’ recovery plan as it would lead to a more competitive price for gas.

Orica has made more supportive statements on the energy mix as part of the Australian Climate Leaders Coalition, supporting updates to market rules to aid decarbonization, deployment of electric vehicle recharging infrastructure, and significant retirement of coal power by 2030, in a November 2021 joint statement signed by Orica’s CEO Sanjeev Gandhi.

Industry Association Governance: Orica has disclosed a list of its memberships to industry associations as part of its 2021 Climate Action Report. However, while it flagged that the company is “partially aligned” with some named associations, including the World Coal Association, it provides no detail of areas of misalignment and does not disclose any of the industry associations’ climate change policy positions. Orica is a direct member of the World Coal Association and associate member of NSW Mineral Council, both of which are engaged in obstructive lobbying on climate policy. Orica’s Vice President Supply Chain APA sits on the board of the Energy Users Association of Australia, which appears to show limited support for action on climate change.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
2NSNANSNS2NS
2NSNSNSNS1NS
01NSNSNSNS1
1NSNSNSNS1NS
0NA0NANANANS
0NSNSNSNSNSNS
1NS-1NSNSNSNS
NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
NSNSNSNSNSNSNS
0NSNSNS-10NS
NSNSNSNS0NSNS
0NA-2NANANANS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
50%
 
50%
 
27%
 
27%
 
76%
 
76%
 
28%
 
28%
 
33%
 
33%
 
62%
 
62%
 
38%
 
38%

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.