Kendra Haven is director of special projects at InfluenceMap, an independent data analysis think tank that tracks companies and industry associations. During the Episcopal Parish Network’s Earth Day 2024 webinar, Haven addressed how multinational oil and gas corporations spend hundreds of millions of dollars annually to shape public image by appearing in favor of reducing emissions. However, claims of “going green” are inconsistent with the companies’ policy engagement. Photo: Screenshot

[Episcopal News Service] On April 22, the Episcopal Parish Network hosted a virtual conversation about corporations impeding climate advocacy progress in observance of Earth Day. The webinar was one of many Earth Day events Episcopal congregations and ministries hosted this year.

“As we celebrate Earth Day today, one way that we can honor God and our faith tenents is by caring for God’s creation,” said JoAnn Hanson, president and chief executive officer of the Church Investment Group, a nonprofit that offers ethical investing resources to Episcopal entities managing endowments.

The Episcopal Parish Network is a national, membership-based organization of clergy and lay leaders representing 200 parishes of all sizes and budgets across the church. The webinar featured two speakers – Kendra Haven, director of special projects, and Cleo Rank, a senior policy analyst – affiliated with InfluenceMap, an independent data analysis think tank that tracks companies and industry associations. The two speakers and Hanson shared how partisan advocates and fossil fuel companies and interest groups direct resources to hinder progress.

“When we look across our database, it’s the industry associations that across the globe in every jurisdiction really are the most powerful and the most negative on climate,” Haven said during the webinar.

Global dependence and investment in fossil fuels continue to dominate the energy sector over renewable sources. Haven pointed out that the industry associations with the most negative impact on climate tend to be concentrated in the United States and Canada, “which might speak to a little bit about why the U.S. has had a little bit more trouble passing ambitious climate policy unlike some countries in Europe.”

InfluenceMap listed the American Petroleum Institute as the most negative and influential industry association, according to a chart featured in the webinar. Another chart highlighted a 2022 analysis of Shell, BP, TotalEnergies, Chevron and ExxonMobil’s public communications showed that these multinational oil and gas corporations spend hundreds of millions of dollars annually to shape public image by appearing in favor of reducing emissions. However, claims of “going green” are inconsistent with the companies’ policy engagement.

“[Lobbying] is promoting narrative. It’s influencing public opinion. It’s appealing to voters as well as policymakers,” Haven said. “From there, it becomes easier for industry or industry interests to shape the climate policy agenda if they had sort of managed to lay that foundation of ‘gas is good,’ or whatever it is, and then get into the even more detailed work like specific budgets or regulations or standards.”

Rank addressed environmental, social and governance – more commonly known as ESG – investing, which is a set of issues and aspects that companies can use to demonstrate “responsible investing.” She also shared the current landscape of the anti-ESG movement, in which companies, organizations, individuals and stakeholders reject or criticize emphasizing ESG in favor of profits only.

“There’s definitely room for positive voices to step up and counter this,” Rank said.

Webinar participants were able to ask Haven and Rank questions using Zoom’s chat function. One participant inquired about greenwashing, a form of advertising and marketing that companies use to appear environmentally friendly but really aren’t. For example, ExxonMobil has advertised that its experimental algae biofuels can potentially reduce transport emissions. However, ExxonMobil has no company-wide net zero target.

“I recognize that these are not easy topics to discuss from the pulpit, particularly in jurisdictions where you’re trying to knit together disparate views,” Hanson said.

However, “all is not lost,” Rank said, highlighting anti-ESG legislation opposition from various groups, including state banking associations and state chambers of commerce. For example, the American Legislative Exchange Council rejected a proposed model anti-ESG bill in 2023.

Haven, Rank and Hanson also shared where participants can find economic literacy resources from InfluenceMap and the Church Investment Group’s websites.

Episcopalians can learn more about the church’s support for the environment and public health here.

-Shireen Korkzan is a reporter and assistant editor for Episcopal News Service based in northern Indiana. She can be reached at skorkzan@episcopalchurch.org.