The Turning Pledges into Progress framework contains a total of 25 metrics in three categories: 1) target setting (“Targets”), 2) strategies for implementation (“Strategies”), and 3) disclosure and reporting (“Disclosure”). Target setting comprises six metrics related to emissions reductions and investment in clean energy. All the signatories to the Oil and Gas Decarbonization Charter (OGDC) are assumed to have the aim of achieving these targets. Strategies for implementation comprise eight metrics that describe steps companies can take to achieve these targets; and disclosure and reporting comprises 11 metrics allowing stakeholders to assess how companies publicly report information relevant to achieving the OGDC goals.

Each company was awarded 1 point for meeting a metric in full, 0.5 for partially meeting a metric, and 0 for not meeting a metric.

The only metric where none of the companies scored full credit is methane investment reporting. Overall, companies achieved higher marks for the target setting metrics, lower scores for the metrics on strategies for implementation, and a mixed performance on the disclosure and reporting metrics. Companies are likely to be doing more on strategies and implementation than their scores imply, with the lack of disclosure on these activities driving scores down.

Companies may opt not to report some of their emissions reduction activities for several reasons, including confidentiality, protection of competitively sensitive information, legal or regulatory restrictions, capacity issues and cultural norms. Further co-operation between government and industry stakeholders is needed to shift the paradigm in transparency.

The average score across all assessed companies was 9 points out of a full score potential of 25. Of the 116 assessed companies, 11 companies did not disclose any information about emissions reduction targets and plans or any emissions data and therefore received a score of zero. The 35 assessed national oil companies (NOCs) on average scored around one point lower than the total average, while the 13 international national oil companies (INOC) in the sample averaged 2.2 points higher.1 The top-scoring company (Equinor) achieved a score of 23 out of 25. The 12 Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI) companies averaged around 19 points, reflecting the group's decade-long focus and collaboration on emissions reduction.

When considering the actual oil and gas production levels of the 116 assessed companies, we find that around half of global oil and gas production is covered by targets consistent with those stated in the OGDC, and around one-third of production comes from companies with at least some form (partial or full credit) of publicly reported strategies for implementing those targets and supporting disclosures and reporting.

Companies that have joined the OGDC on average scored just over 12 out of 25, which is around 6 points higher on average than non-OGDC signatories. This gap is mainly driven by the targets explicitly included as part of the OGDC framework, but they also tend to perform favourably compared with non-OGDC companies on strategy and disclosure metrics. In addition, around 70% of the OGDC signatories have reiterated the OGDC targets in their own publications. The results of the OGDC’s baselining survey of its members are consistent with this analysis.

The reporting period that informs this assessment coincides with the first year of companies signing the OGDC. It is expected that these metrics will continue to improve year-on-year for this subset of industry.

Companies that are members of the Oil and Gas Methane Partnership (OGMP 2.0) on average score 14.8 out of 25, over 8 points higher than the average of non-OGMP companies. This gap is particularly evident for the strategies for implementation and disclosure and reporting metrics, where scores for OGMP 2.0 members were around three times higher on average than non-OGMP companies. This is partly because, for a few metrics, membership of OGMP 2.0 is explicitly integrated into the criteria for assessment. Nonetheless, members of OGMP 2.0 outperformed non-OGMP members even outside those metrics. More OGMP 2.0 members are expected to receive full and partial credit in the coming years as they improve their methane emissions data quality over time, in alignment with the OGMP 2.0 reporting framework.

International oil companies (IOCs) (BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Eni, Shell and TotalEnergies) on average scored 20.4 out of a possible 25, while NOCs averaged 8.0 and independents averaged 8.9. INOCs and NOCs saw wide variation; some achieve similar scores to IOCs (including Equinor, Petrobras, Ecopetrol, Saudi Aramco and KMG), but several do not publish any sustainability reports (including NOCs from Iraq, Libya, Iran, the Russian Federation, Venezuela and Turkmenistan). Among independents, Oxy, Woodside, EQT, Hess and Aker BP were the top five best performers (averaging 17.9), while Canadian oil companies have largely removed any public disclosure of their sustainability reporting. The 12 global companies under the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative scored an average of 18.9, aided by their memberships of the OGDC and OGMP 2.0 as well as a dedicated focus on emissions reduction.