SSAB

InfluenceMap Score
C
Performance Band
68%
Organisation Score
49%
Relationship Score
Sector:
Metals & Mining
Head​quarters:
Stockholm, Sweden
Official Web Site:
Wikipedia:

Climate Lobbying Overview: SSAB appears to strategically engage with climate policy in the EU and US with mixed positions, with more positive engagement in recent years. However, much of this more positive engagement stems from HYBRIT, a joint venture between SSAB, Vattenfall and LKAB to create a fossil-free steel value chain. SSAB and HYBRIT appear to have particularly conflicting positions on reforms to increase the ambition of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS).

Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: SSAB appears to support ambitious climate action in its top-line messaging. In response to an EU public consultation in November 2021, the company stated support for the EU’s Climate Law which aims to make the EU climate neutral by 2050. In a joint letter in June 2021, the CEO Martin Lindqvist supported limiting warming to 1.5°C. In an October 2021 press release, the CEO also supported a policy framework for the industrial transition and global carbon pricing, but stressed that it should support level playing field conditions. In response to EU public consultations in November 2021, SSAB supported ambitious climate policies in order to preserve competitiveness, and HYBRIT was supportive of the EU’s Fit for 55 package. On its corporate website, accessed in January 2022, SSAB supported the goals of the UN Paris Agreement.

Engagement with Climate-Related Regulations: SSAB appears to take mixed positions on specific climate regulations. In response to an EU public consultation in February 2021, SSAB did not support most reforms to increase the ambition of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), and was unsupportive of proposals to reform carbon leakage protection measures in the policy. HYBRIT took a similar position in response to the same EU public consultation in February 2021, and did not support the majority of proposed reforms. However, in November 2021, in response to an EU public consultation, HYBRIT strongly supported reforms to align the EU ETS with the increased 2030 GHG target and supported the revision of the Linear Reduction Factor. SSAB’s CEO Martin Lindqvist signed a joint letter in June 2021 stating support for aligning the EU ETS with the EU’s increased climate ambition. In response to an EU public consultation in November 2021, SSAB supported phasing out the free allocation of emissions allowances in the EU ETS alongside a Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and supported including export rebates, a position which is misaligned with the EU Commission’s proposal. However, SSAB advocated for the inclusion of indirect emissions in the CBAM, which would increase the scope of the policy.

In response to an EU public consultation in February 2021, SSAB stated support for increasing the EU’s 2030 target to 55% emissions reductions. A joint letter signed by the CEO in June 2021 supported a zero emission CO2 target for vehicles by 2035 in the EU. In the same letter, the CEO strongly supported the EU’s increased 2030 renewable energy target of at least 40%, and advocated for the strengthening of the Energy Efficiency Directive and EU energy efficiency legislation for buildings. However, in its 2021 CDP Climate Change Disclosure, SSAB appeared to stress concerns around the economic and technical feasibility of new GHG standards for industry in the US.

Positioning on Energy Transition: SSAB appears to support the energy transition. On its corporate website, accessed in January 2022, the company supported the decarbonization of the steel industry, and in its 2021 CDP Climate Change Disclosure it advocated for carbon contracts for difference in the EU to support breakthrough decarbonization technologies. The CEO Martin Lindqvist signed a joint letter in June 2021 supporting a 100% clean energy mix and the phase out of coal by 2040 in the EU, and advocated for green and zero-carbon hydrogen to decarbonize heavy industry and aviation. However, in a US Q2 2021 lobbying disclosure, SSAB stated it had lobbied for polices to promote “affordable and reliable” sources of energy without specifying what this includes.

Industry Association Governance: SSAB disclosed a list of industry associations it is a member of but with no further details of the groups’ climate policy positions, nor did it disclose the company’s roles within the organizations. The company has not disclosed a review of alignment with industry associations. SSAB retains influential positions in several industry associations which are lobbying negatively on climate change policy, such as Eurofer in Europe and the National Association of Manufacturers in the US.

QUERIES
DATA SOURCES
12NSNSNS2NS
11NS202NS
01NS1111
11NS121NS
0NA1NANANANS
NS0NS0NS1NS
-10-10-110
1NSNS1NS2NS
1NSNSNSNS2NS
111111NS
0NS-12-22NS
0NA-1NANANANS
Strength of Relationship
STRONG
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
WEAK
 
45%
 
45%
 
50%
 
50%
 
29%
 
29%
 
48%
 
48%
 
62%
 
62%
 
90%
 
90%
 
44%
 
44%

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.