As 2025 begins, the U.S. corporate climate advocacy landscape faces renewed challenges. InfluenceMap’s latest briefing highlights a problematic rise in lobbying against climate policy, driven by groups resisting policies aligned with global climate goals. Before Trump entered office and during his first mandate, a few industry groups representing oil and gas deployed an active strategy to promote high emission interests, choosing to move against climate regulations through lawsuits and requests for repeal, as well as by lobbying for policy rollbacks and advocacy for high emission activities. This time around, in addition to a first experience under a Trump administration, these groups are helped by a blueprint strategy they can leverage: the widely discussed “Project 2025” among other policy rollback initiatives, which aims to reverse emissions-reduction measures and strengthen fossil fuel reliance.
Why Will It Impact Everyone?
Climate change is straightforward. More greenhouse gases in the atmosphere translates into more greenhouse effect globally, which means that on average throughout the year, the temperature of the atmosphere rises, which leads to extreme local meteorological impacts (droughts, wildfires, heatwaves, floods) with tangible consequences (low agricultural yields, destruction of infrastructure, lethal temperatures, hydric stress, spread of diseases).
And it comes with feedback loops: the more temperatures rise, the more cascade effects get triggered - melting ice reflects less sunlight into space, which contributes to warming; forest fires emit CO2, which contributes to warming; melting permafrost releases methane, which contributes to warming, and so on.
So here's what the situation looks like.
1.5°C is the Paris Agreement's target because any warming beyond that is considered exponentially unsafe for humans (and, needless to say, destructive for business).
In 2024 we already crossed the 1.5°C threshold - it doesn't mean that we've overshot the 1.5°C target yet as we'd need to cross the threshold for several consecutive years for that to be the case, but still, that's definitely where we're going: we're currently headed towards 3.1°C average warming. Due to the speed at which this is happening, this is unchartered territory.
Our remaining carbon budget to stay under 1.5°C is therefore 275 Gt CO2. Without significant emission reductions, we have roughly 7 years left before we're forced to stop emitting entirely. After that, no more greenhouse gases can be emitted without overshooting the 1.5°C target. No cars, no planes, no heating, no food, no electricity, no buildings, no manufacturing, no steel, no glass, for a lot of people across the world. That's not something anybody wants, so continuing with this thought experiment where we don't reduce emissions, the alternative would logically be to emit for more than 7 years, and overshoot the target. The outcomes wouldn't be any better: draughts, floods, lethal temperatures, loss of homes, farms, and vital infrastructure would force hundreds of millions of people to leave their homes worldwide and further damage nature for millions of years to come.
Reductions are therefore vital. Any credible, realistic plan to mitigate climate change includes a 50% reduction target for 2030, so that the path does in fact lead to net zero by 2050, and so that the journey there is less abrupt. Needless to say, the longer we wait, the more abrupt it will be.
Why recap the current climate situation? Simply to demonstrate that, with the carbon budget we have left, we can't afford initiatives actively working against climate policy.
Membership organisations can provide the guardrails we need, offering a vital counterbalance to pro-emissions lobbying while aligning industry practices with the public interest.
U.S. Membership Organisations Promoting Climate Action
When it comes to membership organisations in the U.S., while a few are advocating for high-emission activities and attempting to reverse low carbon policies, it's only a counter-movement to a global pro-climate trend that has strong roots in the country.
For instance, there has been significant corporate support for the clean tax credits and other climate and energy components of the Inflation Reduction Act. Two-thirds of all evidence of corporate advocacy on the Inflation Reduction Act was supportive, including endorsements from renewable interests and transitioning sectors. Moreover, organisations with vested business interests in a low carbon economy (e.g. clean energy companies) are not the only ones advocating for environmental regulation.
Stepping up to the climate challenge, several automotive companies, including Cummins, Daimler, PACCAR, General Motors, and others, have committed to comply with California's stringent emissions standards, regardless of potential rollbacks.
This indicates a level of industry support for stricter environmental regulations, and could indicate a willingness to keep the market stable.
Even the organisations advocating for the right to emit are doing so while promoting climate action in parallel. The low carbon transition has started, and most organisations globally have at least a proportion of their policy that's in the right place. As climate deadlines get closer, starting the journey to net zero is becoming a short term interest across sectors beyond clean energy industries.
Credible net zero plans, particularly those integrated early, will secure a company's place within the value chain that it's a supplier for. It also secures its position in markets with increasing environmental standards, generates savings and helps with the resilience of its own supply chain.
An early transition will also help businesses absorb the effects of abrupt market shifts that can be expected in the coming decade, when the world economy overshoots the global carbon budget - and regulators are faced with a choice between ramping up environmental regulation, or letting climate change spin out of control. It's therefore only natural that membership organisations promote climate action, as it's in the interest of their members for the next few years.
The economy, through membership organisations, is adapting to the need to go low carbon. Investors, CEO's, businesses, are rallying around membership organisations to generate a coordinated, collective effort to reach net zero. For instance, the We Mean Business Coalition, Ceres, the Renewable Energy Buyers Alliance, the Green Building Council, the B Team are all climate leaders driving sustainable practice across the economy.
Membership Organisations Are The New Climate Leaders
With a likely 180° turn in climate policy on the horizon, U.S. membership organisations are uniquely positioned to lead their industries toward sustainable practices. Adaptation is key, and there are several pathways they can pursue.
Firstly, they are in a solid position to drive the economy in the right direction through the reach they have into supply chains. By influencing their members as suppliers and collaborating with other complementary membership organisations, they can align entire value chains to net zero.
Secondly, in the midst of policy rollback, they can compensate by being the strong leaders that the low carbon economy needs. Take the wind out of the sails, and the oars will keep the boat moving.
As a matter of fact, voluntary net zero standards already exist (from SBTi, ISO to GRI to name a few), and membership organisations can become their ambassadors within their sectors. These standards create a framework to measure emissions, create targets to get them to net zero, implement actions to meet these targets, and report on all of this to ensure there was no cheating during that process.
In addition to these net zero standards, industries need sector-specific standards and alignment for climate action, because each industry has its own needs and constraints: they have a need for best practices to follow, as well as new business models, processes and technologies to implement.
Membership organisations can provide that, ensuring alignment, cooperation and a level playing field.
Thirdly, pro-climate advocacy is another essential strategy. Engaging with policymakers to promote clean energy solutions and emissions reductions can directly counter the influence of anti-climate lobbying.
In the U.S., a majority of organisations representing corporate interests are at least partially aligned with climate imperatives. Collaborating with like-minded organisations amplifies these efforts, creating a stronger and more unified voice.
For example, in Norway, effective representation by the EV industry has led to the country nearly phasing out new petrol and diesel car sales. This success demonstrates the power of collective advocacy, which could inspire similar efforts in the U.S. Even though it's an imperfect achievement, it's still an illustration of how effective membership organisations can be at advocating for pro-climate interests.
Last but not least, education is crucial. By providing members with resources on the economic and social advantages of sustainable policies, organisations can inspire change from within. Highlighting global success stories, such as Norway’s leadership in electric vehicle adoption, underscores the feasibility and benefits of such transformations.
Climate change mitigation is akin to a prisoner's dilemma, with close to 8 billion players. If we cooperate, the reward is a safe environment. If we don't because of self interest, we'll all bare massive costs.
In this context and because of their global reach into both industry and policy, membership organisations are the perfect mediator to align the economy towards net zero in the absence of adequate policy.
Risks and Strategies to Avoid Backlash
While climate advocacy is essential, it brings inherent risks that membership organisations must navigate carefully.
Legal challenges are a significant concern. Entities representing fossil fuel interests may file lawsuits to deter or delay climate action, mirroring cases where certain states have targeted financial institutions for their environmental stances. To mitigate this, organisations should ensure their initiatives comply with legal frameworks and seek expert guidance before launching major programs.
Reputational risks also require careful handling. Climate advocacy can attract criticism from some members or external stakeholders who perceive these efforts as politically divisive. Transparent communication is vital to address concerns and maintain trust.
Reinforcing the non-partisan, science-based nature of these actions can help reassure sceptical audiences. It's a multilevel strategy: by advocating for climate change mitigation, membership organisations act in the interest of their members and for the public good, but sometimes their members don't see things that way. Since membership organisations financially rely on their members, the latter have a lot of control over the former. Negotiating with members and educating them on climate science and the benefits of Net Zero is a necessary foundation for an effective advocacy strategy.
A Way Forward
The resurgence of anti-climate lobbying underscores the urgent need for decisive action from membership organisations. By setting industry standards, advocating for sustainable policies, and educating their members, these organisations can lead the way in addressing climate challenges.
Anticipating risks and crafting strategies to address legal, financial, and reputational concerns ensures that their efforts remain impactful and resilient. In an era of renewed resistance to climate action, membership organisations have the potential to drive meaningful progress and safeguard a sustainable future.
Climate Action for Associations (CAFA) established a Best Practice Framework to follow to help you take steps forward while managing the aforementioned risks. Members of CAGA also have access to a collective of like-minded organisations and individuals for peer-to-peer learning.
Join us today to take action and shape the future of climate action in your industry. As membership organisations, we need to lead the charge toward a sustainable and equitable future.
Comments