This scorecard provides a detailed breakdown of InfluenceMap's assessment of Origin Energy'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 Origin Energy, 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 Origin Energy's company profile - is accessible via the buttons on the right hand side of the page.
A summary of Origin Energy'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 Origin Energy'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 |
|---|---|
| August 2022 | 5/14 (36%) |
| August 2023 | 5/14 (36%) |
| August 2024 | 5/14 (36%) |
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 Origin Energy'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)?
Origin Energy has published a partial account of its positions and engagement activities on specific climate-related policies, but excludes over 3 cases of material evidence of direct climate policy engagement identified by InfluenceMap's database. In its 2025 Sustainability Report, Origin Energy disclosed both its positions on, and engagement with, key legislation, including on the National Electricity Market Review and Guarantee of Origin Scheme.
However, Origin Energy does not appear to have disclosed its engagement with more than 3 climate-related policies, including its June 2025 comments to the Productivity Commission, its February 2025 comments on Victoria's Building Electrification Regulatory Impact Statement, or its July 2024 submission on Unlocking Australia’s Green Metal Opportunity, its comments on the Low Carbon Liquid Fuel Opportunity or its submission on the Hydrogen production Tax Credit.
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)?
Origin has disclosed a complete list of its industry association memberships. However, the company's disclosure on its industry associations is limited to top-line climate statements without reference to specific climate policies. Origin has therefore excluded key instances of engagement with specific climate-related policies by its industry associations.
For example, the Australian Energy Producers comments on Victoria’s Renewable Gas Directions Paper in February 2025, the Australian Pipelines and Gas Association's comments on the National Electricity Market (NEM) Review in February 2025, the Business Council of Australia's comments on the Future Made in Australia in January 2025, or the Australian Energy Council's contribution to the Inquiry into Nuclear Power Generation in December 2024.
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.
This is an assessment of the quality and robustness of a company's processes to identify, report on, and address specific cases of misalignment between its climate policy engagement activities (direct and indirect) and delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement.
The Review Score is split into seven indicators, which fall within one of three categories:
Review Process: Does the company have clear and robust governance processes to regularly assess alignment against the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement, and address potential cases of misalignment?
Review Assessment (Direct - Company): Has the company identified and addressed specific cases of misalignment between its direct - i.e. corporate - climate policy engagement and delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement?
Review Assessment (Indirect – Industry Associations): Has the company identified and addressed specific cases of misalignment between its indirect – i.e. via industry associations - climate policy engagement and delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement?
The table below provides an overview of Origin Energy's performance under each sub-indicator, using the traffic-light assessment framework shown in the key.
| Review Process | Review Assessment (Direct) | Review Assessment (Indirect) |
|---|---|---|
| Monitor & Review | Identify & Assess | Identify & Assess |
| Alignment Assessment Method | Act | Act |
| Framework for Misalignment |
The tables below provide: (1) a breakdown of Origin Energy'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 established an annual monitoring and review process to ensure that all of its direct and indirect climate policy engagement activities across all geographies are consistent with the goal of restricting global temperature rise to 1.5⁰C above pre-industrial levels?
Origin Energy has published an annual review of its industry associations’ since 2019. In its most recent 2024 review, published in August 2024, it states that “Origin reviews its industry association memberships annually and will only maintain memberships that are consistent with the company’s principles for industry association membership outlined in this document.”
Rio Tinto has published detailed assessments of its climate policy engagement on an annual basis from 2018 to 2024, with detailed updates on misaligned industry associations each year. The company has committed to continue reviewing its memberships on an annual basis. Alternatively, Shell publishes a detailed review of its climate policy engagement every two years, with a detailed update in the interim year.
Has the company disclosed a clear and detailed framework for assessing alignment, including: (1) the criteria it uses to assess whether its climate policy engagement activities (direct or indirect) align with the goal of restricting global temperature rise to 1.5⁰C above pre-industrial levels; and (2) a clear and detailed explanation behind each evaluation?
Origin Energy has disclosed a clear explanation of its alignment assessment methodology. The company states that each industry association is assigned an overall level of alignment on their policies, goals and public statements in relation to climate change and the goals of the Paris Agreement. Origin Energy has also clearly detailed the conditions for an association to be ‘Aligned’, ‘Partially aligned’, ‘Misaligned’ or ‘No response’.
However, the company states that industry associations only need to disclose a formal position supporting the goals of the Paris Agreement or achieving net-zero emissions by 2050 to be assessed as aligned. As such, Origin Energy has assessed alignment against top-line policy positions rather than the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement.
The company has however included detailed explanations behind each assessment, including each associations positions on the Paris Agreement and net-zero 2050.
Unilever assessed its industry associations’ climate policy engagement against both its own climate policy positions, and against science-based policy, determined by “what the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has said is needed to keep global warming below 1.5°C”. Unilever states that this assessment does not mean associations should be expected to support every proposed climate law, but that when an association opposes a specific climate policy, it is incumbent on the association to engage constructively with policymakers to help find alternative, viable policy options that would be (at least) equally effective at reducing emissions.
The company also clearly disclosed the criteria for findings of alignment and misalignment with both its own policy positions and science-based policy, and measured the engagement intensity of each association. It also provided clear and detailed explanations behind each evaluation including their detailed policy positions and links to each industry association’s LobbyMap profile.
Has the company established a clear framework to address misalignments between its climate policy engagement activities (direct or indirect) and the goal of restricting global temperature rise to 1.5⁰C above pre-industrial levels, including the escalation strategies it will use and when it will use these escalation strategies?
Origin Energy has disclosed a framework for addressing potential misalignments, including escalation strategies. The company states that it will seek to influence other members to form an aligned industry view in relation to climate change, and that it will review its membership of the relevant industry association in instances of a misalignment in policies or views on climate change. The review will consider the materiality of the misalignment, the value of retaining membership and the prospect of changing views from within.
While Origin Energy discloses that it may remain a member of an industry association it does not have complete alignment with on the basis that there is opportunity for constructive industry dialogue and advocacy, it does state that it will exit any industry association that has a formal policy of climate change denial, actively and consistently promotes anti-climate change messages, or advocates against the goals of the Paris Agreement.
However, Origin Energy has not attached clear deadlines to this framework for industry associations which do not amend misaligned practices.
Iberdrola has disclosed a clear and detailed framework to address potential misalignments, including escalation strategies and deadlines for industry associations that do not amend misaligned practices. Iberdrola's escalation strategy includes engagement with the industry association, sending a "notification of dissatisfaction", and formal notification that a termination of membership is being assessed. If the association does not provide a clear and credible action plan to address the misalignment within 12 months, Iberdrola will implement one or more of the following actions: make a clear public statement regarding the misalignment, request the industry association refrains from engaging on misaligned issues, and/or suspension or discontinuation of membership.
Has the company identified and reported on the existence of all misalignments between its direct climate policy engagement activities and the goal of restricting global temperature rise to 1.5⁰C above pre-industrial levels, in line with InfluenceMap's database (including all of its subsidiaries, business areas, and operational jurisdictions)?
Origin Energy has not undertaken a review of the alignment of its own climate policy engagement activities. As such, the company has not identified any cases of misalignment between its direct climate policy engagement and delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement identified by InfluenceMap’s database.
At the time of this assessment, Origin Energy's Organization Score metric was 59%, indicating partial alignment between the Paris Agreement and the company’s detailed climate policy engagement. Please see the Origin Energy’s profile in the LobbyMap databased for additional details on the company's real-world climate policy engagement activities.
Danone assessed 12 of its own climate policy positions and engagement activities across Europe, the US, and globally. It found all 12 to be aligned. According to InfluenceMap’s database, Danone does not appear to have any material evidence of negative climate policy engagement during the reporting period. As a result, Danone has assessed its climate policy engagement activities in line with InfluenceMap’s findings. It is the only company to have ‘broadly met’ the criteria for this indicator.
Sasol published a detailed review of its direct climate policy engagement in August 2023. Sasol assessed the alignment of five of its own climate policy positions, including four in South Africa (Climate Change Bill; Carbon Tax; PCC Just Transition Framework; Upstream Oil and Gas Tax Regime Discussion Document) and one in the EU (European Union Delegated Acts). However, Sasol did not identify any cases of misalignment with its own climate policy engagement. As such, the company has not identified any cases of misalignment between its direct climate policy engagement and delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement identified by InfluenceMap’s database. The company has not updated its review in 2024.
As a result, no company has shown evidence of identifying cases of misalignment of its direct climate policy engagement and delivering on the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement.
Has the company reported on what action is being (or has been) taken to address misalignments, if and where they exist, between its direct climate policy engagement activities and the goal of restricting global temperature rise to 1.5⁰C above pre-industrial levels, in line with InfluenceMap's database?
Origin Energy has not undertaken a review of the alignment of its own climate policy engagement activities. As such, the company has shown no evidence of action to address cases of misalignment between its direct climate policy engagement and delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement.
Danone and Unilever are the only companies to have ‘broadly met’ the criteria for this indicator by default. Both companies do not appear to have any material evidence of negative climate policy engagement according to InfluenceMap’s database, and therefore have no cases of misalignment to act upon.
As a result, no company has actively shown evidence of acting to address cases of misalignment between its own direct climate policy engagement activities and delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement.
Has the company identified and reported on the existence of all misalignments between the climate policy engagement activities of its actively engaged industry associations, and the goal of restricting global temperature rise to 1.5⁰C above pre-industrial levels, in line with InfluenceMap's database?
Origin has assessed 17 industry associations in its August 2024 review. The company excluded 1 key industry associations actively engaged on climate policy, the Smart Energy Council.
The company finds 8 industry associations to be aligned (including Australian Energy Council (AEC), Business Council of Australia (BCA), Australian Hydrogen Council (AHC)), and 8 to be partially aligned (including the Queensland Resources Council (QRC), Australian Energy Producers (AEP), the Australian Pipelines and Gas Association (APGA), and Australian Industry Greenhouse Network (AIGN)). Origins findings on the Electric Vehicle Council are unclear. The company did not determine any associations to be ‘misaligned’.
InfluenceMap analysis indicates that the company has at least 4 memberships to industry associations with active climate policy engagement misaligned with delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement (ranked D or below on InfluenceMap’s database), including QRC, AEP, APGA, and the Australian Industry Greenhouse Network (AIGN). Origin also has at least 5 memberships to industry associations with active climate policy engagement partially misaligned with delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement (ranked B- to D+), including AEC, BCA, AHC, Gas Energy Australia, and Electric Vehicle Council.
While Origin Energy did identify at least partial misalignment with its 4 misaligned associations, it did not identify any misalignment with AEC, BCA, or AHC. Therefore, the company has not identified key cases of partial misalignment between its industry associations and delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement in line with InfluenceMap’s database. See Appendix A for further details on the company’s industry associations.
Unilever assessed 27 industry associations in its review and identified all cases of misalignment and partial misalignment with its industry associations and the 1.5⁰C goal of the Paris Agreement in line with InfluenceMap's database. Unilever has membership to 1 misaligned industry association (Tennessee Chamber of Commerce & Industry), and 10 partially aligned associations.
Has the company reported on what action is being (or has been) taken to address misalignments, if and where they exist, between the climate policy engagement activities of its industry associations, and the goal of restricting global temperature rise to 1.5⁰C above pre-industrial levels, in line with InfluenceMap's database?
Origin Energy has shown evidence of action to address misalignment. In its 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024 reviews, Origin Energy also outlined its engagement efforts with its industry associations, including the outcomes of this engagement.
For example, the company states in its 2024 review that it has pushed Australian Energy Producers (AEP) and Business Council of Australia (BCA) for stronger and clearer positions on support for net zero emissions by 2050. Origin Energy also states in its 2023 review that it does not intend to renew its membership to the International Gas Union, though it does not cite climate considerations for this decision.
However, the company also states that it engaged with AEP and BCA to have stronger and clearer positions of support on the role of gas in the energy transition as a method of addressing misalignments. The IPCC recommends that in pathways that limit warming to 1.5°C with no or limited overshoot, the global use of gas in 2050 is projected to decline by 45% respectively compared to 2019 levels. It also states that a combination of early retirements, reductions in utilization and the cancellation of new fossil fuel infrastructure would be needed to meet the 1.5°C target.
However, the company does not appear to have shown evidence of action to address specific cases of misalignment and partial misalignment with delivering the 1.5°C goal of the Paris Agreement identified by InfluenceMap’s database.
Unilever is the only company to have met investor expectations in this area, showing evidence of action to address all cases of misalignment between its industry associations and delivering the 1.5⁰C goal of the Paris Agreement, as identified by InfluenceMap’s database. In its review, the company included a section for each association titled “Actions (to be) taken” in which it outlined the actions taken or to be taken with the industry association as per its assessment. For example, Unilever stated that it would write to the Tennessee Chamber of Commerce & Industry stating that their positions do not reflect those of Unilever. It also disclosed it would encourage the European Roundtable for Industry to continue to engage constructively on the EU Green Deal and explore how it can revise its position on the EU Emissions Trading System.
Additionally, Unilever stated that for the 12 associations that were deemed “passively aligned” (minimal to non-existent policy engagement), the company will aim to push the associations to become more actively engaged in promoting outcomes and policies that aid in decarbonization.
Yes, meets criteria
Partial, meets some criteria
No, does not meet criteria
The table below provides a ranking of Origin Energy'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.
| Industry Association | InfluenceMap Performance Band | InfluenceMap Assessment |
|---|---|---|
| Electric Vehicle Council | B+ | Aligned |
| Clean Energy Council | B+ | Aligned |
| Energy Efficiency Council | B+ | Aligned |
| Carbon Market Institute | B+ | Aligned |
| Australian Energy Council | C | Partially Aligned |
| Business Council of Australia | C | Partially Aligned |
| Gas Energy Australia | C | Partially Aligned |
| Queensland Resources Council (QRC) | D+ | Partially Aligned |
| Australian Pipelines and Gas Association | D+ | Partially Aligned |
| Australian Industry Greenhouse Network | D | Misaligned |
| Australian Energy Producers (Formerly APPEA) | E+ | Misaligned |
