Climate Summit or Industry Trade Fair?

In collaboration with InfluenceMap, Transparency International analysed how companies attending COPs engage with climate policy.

The Conference of the Parties (COP), the annual UN climate summit, is the key forum for global decision-making on climate change. Today, from heads of state and climate negotiators to civil society, activists, experts and corporate executives, they all seek to influence and shape the global climate debate from their own perspective.

It’s hardly surprising that private sector representatives are placing themselves at the forefront of climate conversations, especially since climate policies often carry very direct and practical implications for their business operations. Yet, not everyone comes to COP with ambitious climate action in mind, and business participation, in particular, remains highly controversial.

The private sector is often viewed as a key stakeholder in driving climate action and developing solutions to the climate crisis. The post-Paris Agreement model of global climate governance relies on mobilising all sectors of society to meet global greenhouse gas reduction targets. Reflecting this, COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago has called on “all business leaders to join the world in Belém”, where COP30 is set to take place.

Yet, major industries, especially the biggest emitters, have long obstructed the development of ambitious climate policy at both national and international levels. It is therefore crucial not to assume that all companies attending COP do so in good faith. While some corporations signal commitment to climate targets, the absence of mandatory regulation and oversight often results in unsubstantiated claims and widespread greenwashing. Today, nearly two-thirds of companies listed in the Forbes Global 2000 have net zero targets, yet only seven per cent meet minimum integrity standards required to assess whether their plans contain necessary components needed for deep decarbonisation. As a result, concerns about the accountability of business participation at COPs are growing.

To shed light on the risks of unchecked business influence, Transparency International analysed how companies attending COPs engage with climate policy at national and regional levels, using data from LobbyMap, the world’s leading platform by InfluenceMap for tracking and scoring corporate climate lobbying and influence. The results demonstrate the need for stronger oversight: there is a significant discrepancy between corporate rhetoric and their actual stance on policies required to achieve science-aligned climate policy outcomes.

The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the international treaty coordinating the global response to the climate crisis, still lacks a conflict-of-interest policy for COP attendees. This means that private sector representatives, including those whose business model depends on continued fossil fuel emissions, may use the space to network, strike side deals, and even spread climate disinformation, often without meaningful oversight. The outcome is not only a delay in climate action, but also the erosion of public trust in the UN climate process itself, especially as summits increasingly resemble industry trade fairs.

In collaboration with InfluenceMap, we examined 466 companies and industry associations that attended COP28 in Dubai and/or COP29 in Baku listed in the LobbyMap database to assess their climate policy engagement since early 2024. Our findings show that only a minority of companies attending one or both summits have shown clear and active support for global climate frameworks like the Paris Agreement in the past two years. The vast majority are silent or non-committal. Even more troubling, on key regulations needed for the energy transition and deforestation control, there is very significant opposition among the companies that are most actively engaged.

This highlights the need for greater scrutiny about how businesses use COP spaces, and about the narratives and policy solutions they promote. Without stronger oversight, UN climate talks risk becoming platforms for corporate greenwashing - undermining both climate science and the Paris Agreement goals.

Despite their growing presence at COPs, most companies and industry associations are now silent on the core frameworks guiding global climate action. LobbyMap data reveals that 88% of companies attending COP28 and COP29 have not expressed a clear position in support of the Paris Agreement since the beginning of 2024, while 65% have shown no policy engagement on the issue.

According to the UN’s Guide for Responsible Corporate Engagement in Climate Policy, policy engagement encompasses a variety of corporate activities that seek to inform or influence policymaking. These range from advertising, social media, and public relations, to direct contact with regulators and government officials. While some entities may have supported the Paris Agreement in previous years, visible engagement since 2024 remains limited.

The good news: among the small minority actively engaging, most (89%) express supportive positions on the Paris Agreement and 80% on the new round of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs). These NDCs, due ahead of COP30, are a critical measure of whether the world remains on track to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C.

Interestingly, nearly half of the companies actively supporting the Paris Agreement come from high-emission sectors such as energy, metals and mining. This suggests that investors and the level of public scrutiny may be driving more visible commitments, but they also need to be backed with actual climate action.

At a broader level, one-third of companies and industry associations analysed have publicly expressed support for science-aligned action on climate, often through high levels of policy engagement. This suggests that while explicit endorsements of the Paris Agreement remain rare, more businesses are positioning themselves as climate-conscious, at least rhetorically.

This trend mirrors a recent rise in corporate net-zero pledges in 2025, even as political push-back against climate action grows, particularly in the United States. At the same time, several major fossil fuel companies and financial institutions have scaled back or delayed their clean energy commitments.

The energy transition is a complex but essential shift in how we produce and consume energy. At COP28, countries reached a landmark agreement to triple renewable energy capacity by 2030 and transition away from fossil fuels by 2050.

According to the IPCC, reaching net zero by 2050 requires a rapid reduction in fossil fuel use - moving away from coal, oil, and gas toward renewable energy, with carbon capture playing only a limited role. It is therefore crucial to assess whether companies attending COPs are genuinely supporting the pathway indicated by climate science or merely claiming to do so.

Our analysis reveals a concerning gap between corporate rhetoric and reality. While 68% of companies are actively engaged on the topic, through activities ranging from public communications to direct lobbying, 41% hold positions that do not support energy transition policies, and 32% remain ambiguous. Although all countries have endorsed the language on transitioning away from fossil fuels at COP28, only 27% of companies analysed have expressed clear support for it. Even more concerning, over half (54%) of companies with the highest levels of engagement actively oppose energy transition policies - particularly those from energy, utilities, and mining sectors.

This contradiction is stark: some of the world’s largest fossil fuel companies, including BP, Chevron, Equinor, Shell, and Brazilian Petrobras, publicly support science-aligned action on climate while opposing the very policies needed to transition away from fossil fuels.

The reliance on so-called “false solutions” such as carbon capture, bioenergy, and gas as a “transition fuel” continues to dilute corporate climate strategies. These narratives are often used at COP side events to deflect attention from the need to phase out fossil fuels entirely.

COP30 will take place in Belém, in the heart of the Brazilian Amazon, a region central to global climate stability. Forests and biodiversity feature prominently on Brazil’s COP Presidency agenda, under the thematic axis of “Stewarding Forests, Oceans and Biodiversity”.

However, corporate pledges on deforestation often lack credibility. Our analysis shows that only 11% of companies and industry associations have actively engaged in deforestation or land-use policy. Among those, more than two-thirds (71%) do not support such policies.

Even companies that publicly support science-aligned action on climate often fail to back forest protection policies. For instance, Neste, Amazon, Boeing, and BP all display contradictions between their climate messaging and their positions on deforestation and land use regulations.

This disconnect illustrates a broader pattern: many corporations enclose climate goals in principle but resist the specific actions needed to achieve them.

To prevent COPs from becoming platforms for greenwashing, robust mechanisms for transparency and accountability are needed. Responsibility lies with the UNFCCC Secretariat, State Parties to the UNFCCC, and COP Presidencies.

Key steps forward should include:

• Adopting a UNFCCC-wide conflict-of-interest policy for all participants, including COP Presidencies. A widely supported Accountability Framework is already available.

• Mandatory full disclosure of institutional affiliations and financial ties for all accredited participants. This would support independent monitoring and mark a meaningful step toward accountability.

• Issuing best-practice guidelines to help national delegations avoid conflicts of interest, for example, by screening members for industry ties. National delegations have a responsibility to uphold the integrity of the process, and refrain from including representatives from fossil fuel and other high-polluting industries in official state delegations.

• Strengthening oversight of COP Presidencies through disclosure of affiliations, meetings and contracts to ensure impartiality and public trust. This should reflect OECD recommendations on Transparency and Integrity in Lobbying and Influence, including meeting records that are publicly available, timely and specify the policy objective of the engagement.

As COP30 approaches, the need for stronger oversight of business participation has never been more urgent. Without it, the credibility of the UN climate process, and the world’s ability to meet its climate goals, remains at serious risk.