Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing Corporate Influence on Climate Change Dialogue

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover New Trends in Earth-Science Outreach and Engagement

Part of the book series: Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research ((NTHR,volume 38))

Abstract

Companies help shape public dialogue around climate change, and corporate messages on the topic have been diverse: From support for international climate negotiations and green marketing campaigns to doubt about climate science and organized denial campaigns. A sample of 28 U.S.-based companies was analyzed to determine which of these corporate messages have aligned with climate science. In addition, sample companies were identified as consistent or inconsistent in actions related to climate-change. We found that although companies expressed concern about climate change or commitment to mitigation, half of the companies misrepresented climate science in public communications. This chapter concludes with ways to hold companies accountable for their statements on climate change and with recommendations for developing a more science-based dialogue.

Author no longer with the Union of Concerned Scientists.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Begley S, Conant E, Stein S, Clift E, Philips M (2007) The truth about denial. Newsweek, August 13, p 20

    Google Scholar 

  • Broder J (2011) Obama administration abandons stricter air-quality rules. New York Times, September 2. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/science/earth/03air.html?pagewanted=all

  • Brown WM (1986) Hysteria about acid rain. Fortune, April 14. Retrieved from money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1986/04/14/67366/index.htm

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown DA (2012) Ethical analysis of disinformation campaign’s tactics: (1) think tanks, (2) PR campaigns, (3) astroturf groups, and (4) cyber-bullying attacks. Penn State Rock Ethics Institute, State College. Retrieved from rockblogs.psu.edu/climate/2012/02/ethical-analysis-of-disinformation-campaigns-tactics-1-think-tanks-2-pr-campaigns-3-astroturf-groups.html

    Google Scholar 

  • Burnett RD, Hansen DR (2008) Ecoefficiency: defining a role for environmental cost management. Account Org Soc 33(6):551–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • California Secretary of State (2010) Proposition 023—suspends air pollution control laws requiring major polluters to report and reduce greenhouse gas emissions that cause global warming until unemployment drops below specified level. Retrieved from cal-access.ss.ca.gov/Campaign/Measures/Detail.aspx?id = 1324800&session = 2009

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter C (2001) Businesses, green groups, and the media: the role of nongovernmental organizations in the climate change debate. Int Aff 77:313–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christopher M, Lehmann B, Gay D (2011) Monitoring long-term trends of acidic wet deposition in U.S. precipitation: results from the National Atmospheric Deposition Program. PowerPlant Chem 7

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook J, Lewandowsky S (2011) The debunking handbook. University of Queensland, St. Lucia, November 5. ISBN 978-0-646-56812-6. http://sks.to/debunk

  • Dahl R (2010) Greenwashing: do you know what you’re buying? Environ Health Perspect 118(6):247–252. Retrieved from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898878/pdf/ehp-118-a246.pdf

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunlap RE, McCright AM (2011) Organized climate change denial. In: Dryzek J, Norgaard RB, Schlosberg D (eds) Oxford handbook of climate change and society. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 144–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Ecker UK, Lewandowsky S, Swire B, Chang D (2011) Correcting false information in memory: manipulating the strength of misinformation encoding and its retraction. Psychon Bull Rev 18:570–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2009) Endangerment and cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. EPA, Washington, DC. Retrieved from www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html

  • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (2010) Asbestos ban and phase out. EPA, Washington, DC. Retrieved from www.epa.gov/asbestos/pubs/ban.html

  • Giving USA Foundation (2011) The annual report on philanthropy for the year 2010. Giving USA Foundation, Bloomington. Retrieved from www.givingusareports.org

  • International Brotherhood of Teamsters General Fund (2010) Stockholder proposal relating to disclosure of political contributions. International Brotherhood of Teamsters General Fund, Washington, DC. Retrieved from google.brand.edgar-online.com/EFX_dll/EDGARpro.dll?FetchFilingHtmlSection1?SectionID = 7150744-233956-250470&SessionID = n1mvHjaFdF12g77

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacques PJ, Dunlap RE (2008) The organisation of denial: conservative think tanks and environmental skepticism. Environ Polit 17:349–385

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahan DM, Jenkins-Smith H, Braman D (2011) Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. J Risk Res 14:147–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahn FS (1997) Pandora’s box: managerial discretion and the problem of corporate philanthropy. UCLA Law Rev 44(579):519–676

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolk A, Levy D (2001) Winds of change: corporate strategy, climate change, and oil multinationals. Eur Manag J 19(5):501–509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Layzer J (2007) Deep freeze. In: Kraft ME, Kamieniecki S (eds) Business and environmental policy. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 93–125

    Google Scholar 

  • Levy D, Egan D (2003) A neo-Gramscian approach to corporate political strategy: conflict and accommodation in the climate change negotiations. J Manag Stud 40(4):803–829

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewandowsky S, Ecker UKH, Seifert CM, Schwarz N, Cook J (2012) Misinformation and its correction: continued influence and successful debiasing. Psychol Sci Public Interest 13(3):106–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mann ME (2012) The hockey stick and the climate wars. Columbia University, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthiessen P (1999) Environmentalist Rachel Carson. Time Magazine, March 29. Retrieved from www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,990622-3,00.html

  • McGarity TO, Wagner WE (2008) Harassing scientists. In: Bending science: how special interests corrupt public health research. Harvard University, Cambridge, pp 160–163

    Google Scholar 

  • Meyer SM (1995) The economic impact of environmental regulation. J Environ Law Pract 3(2):4–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaels D (2008) Workplace cancer before OSHA. In: Doubt is their product: how industry’s assault on science threatens your health. Oxford University, New York, pp 12–28

    Google Scholar 

  • National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) (2009) Comments in Endangerment and cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. Document EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171, Commenter 3704. EPA, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council (NRC) (1981) Atmosphere-biosphere interactions: toward a better understanding of the ecological consequences of fossil fuel combustion. National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Oreskes N, Conway EM (2010) Merchants of doubt: how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Bloomsbury, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Tonello M (2011) Making the business case for corporate philanthropy. In Harvard Law School forum on corporate governance and financial regulation, August 20. Retrieved from blogs.law.harvard.edu/corpgov/2011/08/20/making-the-business-case-for-corporate-philanthropy/

    Google Scholar 

  • Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) (2008) Federal science and the public good: securing the integrity of science in policy making. Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/Federal-Science-and-the-Public-Good-12-08-Update.pdf

  • Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) (2009) FDA medical device approval based on politics, not science. Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/fda-medical-device-approval.html

  • Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) (2012a) Heads they win, tails we lose: how corporations corrupt science at the public’s expense. Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/how-corporations-corrupt-science.pdf

  • Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) (2012b) A climate of corporate control: how corporations have influenced the U.S. dialogue on climate science and policy. Union of Concerned Scientists, Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from www.ucsusa.org/corporateclimate

  • U.S. Chamber of Commerce (2009) Comments in Endangerment and cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act. Document EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0171, Commenter 3347. EPA, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogel D (2005) The market for virtue: the potential and limits of corporate social responsibility. Brookings Institution, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber EU, Stern PC (2011) Public understanding of climate change in the United States. Am Psychol 66:315–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • YCharts (n.d.) Market capitalization of companies, 2009–2011. Retrieved from ycharts.com/

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Union of Concerned Scientists, 1825 K St NW Suite 800, Washington, DC, 20006-1232, USA

    Gretchen Goldman Ph.D.

  2. Union of Concerned Scientists, Washington, DC, USA

    Francesca Grifo Ph.D., Paul Rogerson MS & Benjamin L. Gutman Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Gretchen Goldman Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Francesca Grifo Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul Rogerson MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Benjamin L. Gutman Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gretchen Goldman Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. College of Liberal Arts, The University of Findlay, Findlay, Ohio, USA

    Jeanette L. Drake

  2. Scenarios Network for Alaska and Arctic Planning (SNAP), International Arctic Research Center (IARC), University of Alaska-Fairbanks, Fairbanks, Alaska, USA

    Yekaterina Y. Kontar

  3. Education and Biology, The University of Findlay, Findlay, Ohio, USA

    Gwynne S. Rife

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Goldman, G., Grifo, F., Rogerson, P., Gutman, B.L. (2014). Assessing Corporate Influence on Climate Change Dialogue. In: Drake, J., Kontar, Y., Rife, G. (eds) New Trends in Earth-Science Outreach and Engagement. Advances in Natural and Technological Hazards Research, vol 38. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-01821-8_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation