This scorecard provides a detailed breakdown of InfluenceMap's assessment of Airbus Group's disclosures on climate policy engagement. This does not include an assessment of the company's real-world climate policy engagement, which can be found on InfluenceMap's online profile of Airbus Group, accessible via the buttons on the right hand side of the page.
The disclosure assessments are directly integrated into the CA100+ Net Zero Company Benchmark as part of InfluenceMap's Climate Policy Engagement Alignment’ assessment, under two distinct indicators:
In 2023, InfluenceMap’s methodology to assess corporate disclosures on climate policy engagement was formally updated in line with the Global Standard on Responsible Climate Lobbying and stakeholder input. The detailed methodology - as well as additional resources including best practice guidance and Airbus Group's company profile - is accessible via the buttons on the right hand side of the page.
A summary of Airbus Group's performance under this assessment is shown below, using the traffic-light assessment framework shown in the key. A more detailed breakdown is available below.
| Indicator | Score |
|---|---|
| Accuracy of Climate Policy Engagement Disclosure | Partial, meets some criteria |
| Sub-Indicator | Score |
|---|---|
| Accuracy of Direct Climate Policy Engagement Disclosure | Partial, meets some criteria |
| Accuracy of Indirect Climate Policy Engagement Disclosure | No, does not meet criteria |
A summary of Airbus Group's performance under this assessment is shown below, using the traffic-light assessment framework shown in the key. A more detailed breakdown is available below.
The Review Score (0-100) assesses corporate performance against seven indicators, using the same traffic-light framework. A ‘Green’ scores 2 points, a ‘Yellow’ scores 1 point, and a ‘Red’ scores 0 points. This total is converted into a percentage from 0 to 100, calculated using the total number of points available (14). As such, only certain scores within the 0 to 100 range are possible under this methodology. A Review Score of 100 would indicate that a company has met all of the assessment criteria related to the review process.
| Date of Review | Score |
|---|---|
| N/A | No Review Published |
This is an assessment of the accuracy of a company's reporting on its direct and indirect (via industry associations) climate policy engagement activities.
InfluenceMap utilizes its proprietary database to assess how corporate disclosures on climate policy positions and engagement activities compare to InfluenceMap's independent assessment of the companies' and industry associations' real-world climate policy engagement. In short, it assesses the extent to which the company has disclosed on all climate policy engagement identified by InfluenceMap's database.
The tables below provide: (1) a breakdown of Airbus Group's performance under each sub-indicator, using the traffic-light assessment framework shown in the key; and (2) examples of leading practice by companies.
Has the company published an accurate account of its corporate climate policy positions and engagement activities (as compared to InfluenceMap’s database)?
Airbus has published a partial account of its positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies, but excludes and/or provides a misleading account on over 3 cases of material evidence of direct climate policy engagement identified by InfluenceMap's database.
Airbus has disclosed its position on, and engagement with, specific climate-related policies, including on a long-term aspirational goal (LTAG) through ICAO, CORSIA, policies incentivizing the use and uptake of SAF, an Australian SAF mandate, a global 2030 5% carbon intensity reduction target using SAFs, ICAO's CORSIA sustainability criteria for SAFs, and the certification of carbon removal legislation.
However, Airbus does not appear to have disclosed a complete and accurate account of its climate policy engagement. For example, Airbus did not disclose it supported the UK SAF mandate with exceptions in a June 2023 consultation response and supported SAF incentives in Canada in a February 2024 letter to the Prime Minister. It also replied to the consultation on the non-CO2 Monitoring, Reporting and Verification scheme, advocating for the scheme to be reviewed before its extension in July 2024. Airbus pushed for crop-based SAF in an April 2024 joint letter to US policymakers and opposed a cap on Hydrotreated Esters and Fatty Acids in a June 2023 consultation response. Finally, Airbus engaged on the Net-Zero Industry Act in June 2023 consultation responses.
Enel has published a complete and accurate account of its positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies, and this is aligned with InfluenceMap's assessment of the company using its LobbyMap database. Enel included its climate advocacy activities, positions, and links to the company’s government consultation responses to specific climate-related policies from 2022-2024 in its 2023 Climate Policy Advocacy report, published April 2024. It also covered a range of regions in its disclosure, including Global, Europe, North & South America, Africa, and the Asia Pacific.
BP partially met the assessment criteria under this indicator, as it excluded material evidence of climate policy engagement. However, BP’s ‘Advocacy Activities’ webpage provides a clear and detailed disclosure of the company’s climate policy engagement, with filters for jurisdiction; date; and topic, including links to relevant consultation responses. It also contains sorting options for most recent, and most relevant.
Has the company published an accurate account of the climate policy positions and engagement activities of the industry associations of which it is a member (as compared to InfluenceMap’s database)?
While Airbus stated it works with the International Air Transport Association (IATA), it did not disclose a list of industry association memberships. Airbus is a member of multiple industry associations engaged on climate-related policy, including but not limited to the Federation of German Industries (BDI), Confederation of British Industry (CBI), Spanish Confederation of Business Organizations (CEOE), Aerospace Industries Association and Airlines for Europe.
As such, Airbus does not appear to have disclosed an account of its industry associations' positions and engagement activities. It has therefore excluded key instances of engagement with specific climate-related policies by its industry associations. For example, A4E advocated to weaken the non-CO2 monitoring, reporting and verification framework under the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) in a June 2024 Joint Proposal sent to policymakers and IATA opposed a full scope EU ETS non CO2 monitoring, reporting, and verifying (MRV) in a July 2024 Feedback.
See Appendix A below for details of the company's industry association memberships.
Unilever has published a complete and accurate account of its industry associations' positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies. In its March 2024 industry association review, the company attached LobbyMap profile links to each association’s assessment. Iberdrola published a largely complete and accurate of its industry associations' positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies.
Iberdrola and its North American subsidiary Avangrid both disclosed the climate policy engagement activities of their industry associations in their respective industry association climate lobbying reviews.
Yes, meets criteria
Partial, meets some criteria
No, does not meet criteria
The table below provides a ranking of Airbus Group's industry associations currently covered by InfluenceMap’s database by Performance Band, i.e. a full measure of a company’s climate policy engagement, accounting for both its own engagement and that of its industry associations. Detailed profiles for all industry associations can be explored via the links in the table.
Industry associations are categorized by InfluenceMap as having climate policy engagement that is aligned, partially misaligned or misaligned with delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement by Performance Band:
The ranking table below is updated automatically on a continual basis as: (1) new evidence is collected for the industry associations; (2) new industry associations are added to the company profile; (3) industry associations are removed from the company profile, e.g. if the company leaves the association.
As such, the industry associations and/or scores in the ranking table below may differ from the findings in Identify & Assess (Indirect) above, which was written on the date of assessment. See the top of this page for the date of assessment.
