The latest insights from the We Mean Business coalition

From Belém to Brussels: How European companies can keep up the pressure on climate policy

EU companies demonstrated strong climate leadership at COP30 in Belém. EDF, H&M Group, Ingka Group, Saint-Gobain, Signify, SSAB, SSE plc, Vattenfall, VELUX and Volvo Cars were among those to call on governments to commit to initiating a roadmap to transition away from fossil fuels and toward a future of renewable energy, clean electrification and greater energy resilience. 

On the eve of COP, EU ministers agreed a landmark deal to reduce emissions by 90% by 2040. The long-awaited decision was made possible in large part by consistent calls from EU companies and investors for clear, credible targets to unlock investment, innovation and competitiveness across European industries. 

But there have been bumps and hurdles on the road, with trade groups and corporate interests successfully lobbying for the weakening of the EU’s corporate sustainability due diligence directive (CSDDD) and corporate sustainability reporting directive (CSRD). Meanwhile, many influential industry associations in Brussels and member state capitals have been consistently pushing the narrative that climate policies are adversely impacting European competitiveness. These unhelpful political narratives fly in the face of the corporate reality that companies investing in the clean energy transition are improving their profitability and resilience. 

European policymakers are now shifting their attention to how the bloc delivers on its climate target in terms of the implementation policies and funding models to drive the clean energy transition and improve EU industry competitiveness. There is a political opportunity for companies to engage to secure the key enabling policies they need to deliver their transition plans and create a level playing field in their sector. The age of electrification and clean energy is here, and companies must make their voices heard on the government policies needed to remove barriers and level the playing field so they can continue to accelerate the transition and secure resilience, competitiveness and lower costs. 

Corporate engagement and advocacy at COP30 was hugely welcome but must now be built on with detailed policy engagement back home in EU capitals and Brussels. Responsible Policy Engagement (RPE) provides the best practice and guidance to help EU companies keep up the pressure on climate policy and deliver the breakthroughs they need to deliver their transition plans. 

The foundational principles of RPE – committing to speak up, following through on commitments with clear and consistent advocacy, aligning trade associations, allocating advocacy spending, and disclosing advocacy activity – can be applied by all companies, and best-in-class tools and guidance for doing so are available in our RPE Resource Library. 

EU companies have slowly but consistently become louder and more effective climate policy advocates. A recent analysis by InfluenceMap found 23% of firms in the EU are actively lobbying for climate policy, up from just 3% in 2019. Many leading companies with global or regional headquarters in the EU are already incorporating RPE into their strategies.

The EU institutions also play an important role in embedding transparency and accountability in corporate engagement with the EU policy processes, which can help to embed RPE as business as usual. Below are a series of examples of company action, followed by a set of recommendations for driving RPE across the EU institutions. 

Quotations are taken from company remarks at a We Mean Business Coalition and InfluenceMap event at Climate Week New York in September 2025.

Establishing governance and internal alignment on climate advocacy

At Coca-Cola Europacific Partners (CCEP), the Public Affairs (PA), Sustainability, and Procurement teams work in close coordination with the Supply Chain function to ensure consistent and aligned climate-related policy engagement.

French energy company EDF is strengthening its internal governance and monitoring systems to better track and evaluate policy engagement practices, ensuring full consistency with the company’s net-zero strategy.

Speaking up for climate policy and stability

As a hard-to-abate sector, the transformation needed in the cement industry is substantial. Cédric de Meeûs, Chief Public Policy & Government Relations Officer at Swiss-based Holcim, the first concrete company to set a science-based target, said: 

“To achieve the necessary transition, we need a distinct shift in the policy environment—one that unlocks large-scale investments and enables the deployment of advanced technologies. In Europe, the last decade saw the evolution of a regulatory framework moving in that direction: starting with the various phases of the EU Emissions Trading System and going all the way to 2030 and 2050 emission reduction targets being inscribed into EU law, the establishment of an ambitious Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, and the implementation of the EU Innovation Fund.

“Our message to policymakers in Europe and beyond is clear: don’t turn around, don’t delay, don’t dilute. The development of first-of-a-kind carbon management value chains is well underway. This requires unprecedented collaboration between the private and public sector, to de-risk the deployment, at scale, of innovative technologies and products. The cornerstone of that collaboration rests on a stable policy and regulatory ecosystem.”

Representing another hard-to-abate sector, Danish shipping company Maersk is also clear on the need for supportive policy to enable the delivery of climate goals. Lene Bjørn Serpa, Head of Corporate Sustainability, said: 

“Maersk has very high climate ambitions, and achieving them depends on having the right policy frameworks in place to support the maritime sector’s transition. Global coordination is critical for our industry. We’re working toward ambitious targets, but we need supporting measures in place to make them happen, including incentives and penalties that create a level playing field and drive industry-wide progress.”

Aligning trade associations 

CCEP conducts regular stakeholder mapping exercises to identify the most impactful trade associations and coalitions to engage with. CCEP also systematically evaluates trade association alignment with its Responsible Policy Engagement (RPE) objectives to ensure membership is supporting climate goals. 

EDF engages with around 35 industry associations working on climate-related public policy. The company has established an internal review process – led jointly by Public Affairs, Regulation, International Affairs, CSR, R&D, Strategy and business units – to assess each association’s alignment with EDF’s climate and sustainability principles. Reviews are submitted to the corporate-level Impact Directorate. 

Unilever published a review of the climate policy activity of its trade associations, including which were aligned or misaligned with the company’s own climate goals. The company has seen a decrease in the number of trade associations misaligned with its climate policies: 18 out of 26 of the industry bodies surveyed had no examples of misalignment with the company’s policies in 2024, up from 13 out of 27 the previous year.

Actively managing trade group misalignment

Spanish utility company Iberdrola implements a follow-up plan for any association it identifies as ‘reluctant’ or ‘not aligned’ on climate, which may ultimately result in withdrawing from that association. In cases of serious misalignment the company follows a clear procedure, beginning with intensifying constructive engagement and seeking to build alliances with members who share its position. If no solution is found, the issue is escalated to senior leadership – both within Iberdrola and within the association. Should misalignment persist, Iberdrola issues a formal ‘notification of dissatisfaction’ and informs the association that an internal process to assess potential membership termination has begun. 

In early 2025 Unilever and Nestlé added a disclaimer to a letter sent by the European Round Table on Industry (ERT) to policymakers, in which the ERT urged the European Commission to substantially scale back its sustainability reporting and due diligence requirements. 

Unilever also confirmed in its April 2025 Climate Policy Engagement Review that it formally asked the German Chemical Industry Association (VCI) to stop using its branding in marketing materials. The action was taken because the VCI’s advocacy positions on renewable energy and carbon pricing were misaligned with Unilever’s own climate policy goals. 

In the words of Unilever’s Global Sustainability Senior Manager Fiona Duggan: “On trade associations, our view is straightforward: when our trade associations aren’t aligned with our climate transition plans, that’s not good value for our money. Misalignment means we’re invested in an association, but it is not reflecting our values or our business needs.

“Last year, we conducted our first industry association review, and we’ve updated that review in 2025. In our 2025 review, we saw positive progress among our trade associations and a decrease in misalignment. Much of this progress, however, comes from associations shifting from obstructive to passive. To make progress, we need to see a shift from passive to active in favor of ambitious climate policy. We are actively working to change this dynamic, including by providing a key recommendation to each of our industry groups. 

“It’s easy to be against something, but it’s much harder and more nuanced to be for something. But it’s the work worth doing, and it’s the work that needs doing.”

In 2022, Volvo left the European Automobile Manufacturers Association (ACEA) in response to the association’s opposition to the EU’s target to ban fossil fuel vehicles from 2035, a position that conflicted with Volvo’s commitment to having a fully-electric car range by 2030.

Disclosing advocacy activity

Orsted’s 2024 annual report provides a best-in-class level of transparency, detailing its advocacy-related spending and breaking down the €6.16 million (46 million DKK) budget by region and by category – including lobbying firms, trade associations, NGOs and think tanks.  

Gonzalo Sáenz de Miera, Director of Climate Change and Alliances at Iberdrola, said: “Information on both direct and indirect climate advocacy activities is clearly lacking, and companies have a responsibility to help fill this gap. We address this in three key ways: by ensuring transparency in our direct and indirect advocacy; by assessing the alignment of our industry association memberships with our own positions; and by developing a methodology to manage misalignments when they arise.”

Explore the full RPE Framework for tools to embed responsible advocacy into corporate strategies.

Recommendations for driving higher standards of corporate advocacy with the EU institutions:

1. Drive consistent corporate lobbying accountability across the EU institutions

In order to provide a level playing field between the EU institutions, Transparency Register provisions for corporate, trade group and other stakeholder engagement should apply to the European Council and the engagement with permanent representations.

2. Ensure balanced representation of interests

In order to avoid overrepresentation of some large lobby groups, efforts by the EU institutions should be made to apply the principle of balanced representation by all interest groups (including between multinationals and SMEs) in the policy process – from high level political meetings to consultations.

3. Harmonise EU standards and definitions on lobbying and disclosure

Transparency International makes the case for the adoption of EU-wide standards on lobbying in order to create a baseline level of transparency and integrity across Member States. These standards would include an EU-wide definition of interest representation including all organisations seeking to influence public decision-making. It would be worth exploring the role of the European Single Access Point (ESAP) in harmonizing lobbying rules across Member States.

4. Create Member State lobbying registers

Member States should consider setting up national lobbying registers and publishing key harmonised data for all interest representatives in open and accessible formats. This would include unique identifying numbers for organisations active in different Member States and/or at EU level.

5. Identify and build on best practice in Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) advocacy disclosures

CSRD provides companies with a valuable platform to understand how their political engagement links with their climate commitments.The new ESRS G1 – Business Conduct guidance for G1-5 have significantly simplified the expectations of what companies should disclose on their lobbying activities and the relevant governance. Going forward, identifying best practice for what companies disclose on their direct and indirect lobbying activities will be important to drive higher standards, including those expected from leading investors.

6. Refine guidance on lobbying expenditure reporting 

There are notable differences in how companies define and account for lobbying expenditures in their CSRD disclosures to date. Additional guidance on accounting for direct lobbying by companies and the costs incurred, especially those relating to direct advocacy by company leadership, will be critical to making sense of the various investments that companies are putting towards influencing policy outcomes.

7. Enhance transparency in regulated sectors 

Greater transparency on climate policy advocacy is needed among highly-regulated industry companies, especially those with science-based targets. So far in CSRD disclosures companies in regulated sectors have included limited detail on political engagement spending, despite operating in industries where government relations is fundamental to business practice.