This article was accepted into the corpus but its outbound wikilinks were never NER-processed — typical at the deepest BFS hop or when the run's entity cap was reached. No expansion funnel to show.
| InfluenceMap | |
|---|---|
| Name | InfluenceMap |
| Type | Nonprofit research organisation |
| Founded | 2014 |
| Founder | Arjuna Sittampalam |
| Headquarters | London |
| Focus | Climate policy analysis, corporate lobbying, fossil fuel influence |
InfluenceMap
InfluenceMap is a London-based research organisation that assesses corporate and policy influence on climate outcomes, producing analyses used by investors, activists, and policymakers. Its reports intersect with organizations such as Greenpeace, World Wildlife Fund, ClientEarth, Sierra Club, and 350.org while informing stakeholders including BlackRock, Vanguard Group, Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global, European Commission, and United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. InfluenceMap's work is cited in contexts involving Paris Agreement, COP26, COP21, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and International Energy Agency deliberations.
InfluenceMap publishes quantitative assessments and qualitative reports on corporate lobbying, policy positions, and trade association behaviour that affect climate policy debates involving actors like Shell plc, BP, ExxonMobil, Chevron Corporation, and Glencore. Its outputs are used by financial institutions such as HSBC, State Street Corporation, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and Goldman Sachs as well as non-governmental organizations including Friends of the Earth, Rainforest Alliance, World Resources Institute, Carbon Tracker Initiative, and Grantham Research Institute. The organisation operates at the intersection of research practices exemplified by Bloomberg Philanthropies, Rockefeller Foundation, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Chatham House, and Royal Society. InfluenceMap engages with legal and regulatory frameworks like European Green Deal, UK Climate Change Act 2008, US Clean Air Act, Securities Exchange Commission, and Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures.
Founded in 2014 by Arjuna Sittampalam, the organisation developed amid debates following events such as ExxonMobil climate controversy, the aftermath of 2015 Paris Agreement, and campaigns by groups like Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace International. Early work responded to investigative reporting by outlets including The Guardian, New York Times, and Financial Times and to research from Union of Concerned Scientists and Climate Accountability Institute. InfluenceMap expanded through collaborations with academic institutions like University of Oxford, London School of Economics, Imperial College London, Stanford University, and Columbia University and through partnerships with investors responding to shareholder resolutions at corporations such as Chevron Corporation and Royal Dutch Shell plc. Its timeline includes analyses that were referenced during sessions at United Nations Environment Programme, OECD, and meetings of the G20.
InfluenceMap combines public record analysis, quantitative scoring, and network mapping using sources such as company filings submitted to Companies House, regulatory submissions to Securities and Exchange Commission, lobbying registries like those of the European Union, and media coverage from outlets including BBC News, Reuters, and Associated Press. The methodology draws on practices from network analysis applications in studies by Harvard University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Princeton University, and Yale University and employs metrics akin to those used by CDP (organisation), MSCI, Sustainalytics, and FTSE Russell. InfluenceMap’s scoring framework assesses alignment with policy milestones such as Paris Agreement commitments, national pledges under Nationally Determined Contributions, and pathways modelled by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Data processing leverages tools and standards referenced by International Organization for Standardization, Open Data Institute, Google Cloud Platform, and Amazon Web Services.
Stakeholders use InfluenceMap reports for investor engagement involving firms like BlackRock, Vanguard, CalPERS, Norwegian Government Pension Fund Global, and Templeton as well as for NGO campaigning by Sierra Club, 350.org, Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace, and ClientEarth. Policymakers reference its findings in discussions at bodies such as European Parliament, UK Parliament, US Congress, United Nations General Assembly, and G20 Summit. Corporations cite or respond to its work during annual general meetings at Shell plc, BP, ExxonMobil, TotalEnergies, and Chevron Corporation, and ratings inform divestment and stewardship decisions by institutions like CalSTRS and Norfolk County Council Pension Fund. Academic researchers at University of Cambridge, London School of Economics, Columbia University, University of California, Berkeley, and University of Sydney use its datasets in peer-reviewed studies.
Critics from industry associations such as International Association of Oil & Gas Producers and trade groups like American Petroleum Institute have challenged Attribution and scoring methods, echoing debates seen in critiques of MSCI and Sustainalytics. Scholars at King's College London, University College London, and Australian National University have raised concerns about reliance on public statements versus private activity, similar to disputes in literature involving Corporate Political Activity and analyses by Transparency International. Limitations include uneven global lobbying transparency across jurisdictions like United States, European Union, China, India, and Brazil, and methodological constraints comparable to those discussed in evaluations of carbon accounting and climate scenario analysis.
Notable reports have examined corporate positions during policy moments such as debates over UK Climate Change Act 2008 amendments, responses to the 2015 Paris Agreement, and lobbying around Green New Deal proposals. InfluenceMap analyses influenced shareholder resolutions at meetings of Shell plc and ExxonMobil and were cited in briefings by Greenpeace, ClientEarth, Friends of the Earth, Union of Concerned Scientists, and investor coalitions including Ceres and Climate Action 100+. Case studies compare industry behaviour to academic scenarios from Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, International Energy Agency, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and modeling used by Nationally Determined Contributions.
Related topics include corporate accountability frameworks such as Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures, climate finance mechanisms discussed by Green Climate Fund and World Bank, investor stewardship initiatives like Climate Action 100+ and Principles for Responsible Investment, and advocacy movements exemplified by Extinction Rebellion, Fridays for Future, 350.org, and Friends of the Earth. Analytical parallels exist with organizations and tools including Carbon Tracker Initiative, CDP (organisation), MSCI, Sustainalytics, BloombergNEF, and research centers at Oxford University, Stanford University, and Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.