This briefing analyzes climate and energy policy engagement of five of India’s biggest steelmakers: Tata Steel, JSW Steel, ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India (AM/NS India), Jindal Steel Limited (JSL), and Steel Authority of India Limited (SAIL), along with the Indian Steel Association (ISA).
Overview of Climate & Energy Policy Engagement: InfluenceMap's analysis of the Indian steel sector's climate and energy policy engagement finds that the sector's engagement is only partially aligned with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)'s recommended policy pathways to achieve the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement. Compared with other regions assessed on InfluenceMap's Steel Platform, the Indian steel sector generally adopts more supportive positions across a range of climate and energy policies, although overall engagement remains limited. Tata Steel stands out by demonstrating strategic and sustained engagement across a range of climate and energy policies.
Engagement with Domestic Climate Policy: India has implemented a range of sector-specific climate and energy policies for the steel sector, in addition to its 2035 and 2070 climate targets. This briefing analyzes the engagement on four of these policies: the Steel Scrap Recycling Policy, the National Green Hydrogen Mission (NGHM), the Green Steel Taxonomy, and a proposed Green Steel Public Procurement Policy. The analysis finds that the Indian steel sector generally adopts supportive positions on these policies, although the depth and consistency of engagement vary across companies.
Engagement with EU CBAM: The European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) has significant implications for steel-exporting countries, including India. The analysis finds that while direct advocacy on the CBAM itself is limited or unclear, in recent years, Indian steel sector entities have advocated for India to develop its own carbon pricing framework to support the decarbonization of the domestic steel sector and reduce the impact of the CBAM on exports. This contrasts with other Asian steel producers, particularly in Japan and Korea, where companies have previously pushed back strongly against the implementation of the CBAM.
Performance on Transparency and Disclosure Framework: The Indian steel sector generally provides more transparent disclosures of its climate and energy policy engagement through the Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting (BRSR) framework than other sectors assessed as part of InfluenceMap's India Platform. However, more detailed disclosure of climate and energy policy engagement, particularly on specific policies and advocacy activities, will be needed to meet evolving global investor expectations.
This briefing details positions on climate and energy policy engagement from five of India’s biggest steelmakers: Tata Steel, JSW Steel, ArcelorMittal Nippon Steel India (AM/NS India), Jindal Steel Limited (JSL), and Steel Authority of India (SAIL), in addition to the Indian Steel Association (ISA).1 It examines the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and how the Indian steel sector's engagement has evolved in response to the policy. The briefing also assesses how the sector has responded to India's Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting (BRSR) framework with respect to direct and indirect climate and energy policy engagement.
InfluenceMap assesses corporate climate and energy policy engagement using the principles set out in the United Nations' Guide for Responsible Corporate Engagement in Climate Policy (2013). A full explanation of our methodology can be found here.
India is the world’s second-largest producer of crude steel, producing 149.4 million tonnes of steel in 2024, behind China, which had the largest production at 1005.1 million tonnes in 2024. Despite being a distant second in steel production, India’s steel sector is expected to grow rapidly well beyond 2030, to support the country’s development goals and a rising per-capita consumption of steel. The International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts that by 2050, almost a fifth of the global steel production will be from India.
India’s steel sector can be divided into two subsectors: primary steelmakers or integrated steel plants (ISPs) and secondary steelmakers. The primary sector, comprising India’s largest steel companies, typically employs more carbon-intensive production methods, such as Blast Furnace-Basic Oxygen Furnace (BF-BOF), whereas the secondary sector utilizes less carbon-intensive methods, including Direct Reduced Iron-Electric Arc Furnace (DRI-EAF).
The five large primary steelmakers covered in this briefing have a combined production capacity of 89.41 million tonnes in India as of September 2024, as shown in Figure 1.
Aside from India’s climate targets under the recently announced 2035 Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC), the government has implemented a range of sector-specific policies to support the deep decarbonization of the steel sector and meet India’s 2070 net zero target. These include:
National Steel Policy (2017): Formulated as a long-term roadmap for the steel sector, the National Steel Policy aims to make India a leading producer of high-grade, energy-efficient, low-carbon steel. This policy seeks to increase India’s total steel capacity to 300 Million Tonnes Per Annum (MTPA) by 2030. Most notably, the policy acknowledges the carbon footprint of coal-based production methods and encourages the use of a variety of production methods to reduce it to meet India’s climate targets.
Every ton of scrap used reduces GHG emissions by 58%; however, the Indian steel sector faces a deficit of scrap. Therefore, the government of India has formulated the following policies to increase the availability of steel scrap, which include the Steel Scrap Recycling Policy (2019) and Vehicle Scrappage Policy (2021). The latter also aims to reduce vehicular pollution from end-of-life vehicles by incentivizing vehicle owners to scrap them through a scientific scrapping process.
National Green Hydrogen Mission (NGHM) (2023): The National Green Hydrogen Mission targets the production of 5 million metric tonnes of green hydrogen by 2030, with dedicated funding for pilot plants producing and utilizing hydrogen in iron and steelmaking. This includes support for hydrogen use in DRI production and its use in EAF plant upgrades, blast furnace modifications, and related design and technology development.
Greening the Steel Sector in India: Roadmap and Action Plan: In September 2024, the government of India released a report titled “Greening the Steel Sector in India: Roadmap and Action Plan.” This report lays out the strategies for transitioning the sector in line with India’s 2070 net-zero target, including improving energy efficiency/material efficiency and increased use of renewable energy, green hydrogen, carbon capture utilization and storage (CCUS), and biomass.
Green Steel Taxonomy: In December 2024, the government of India announced the Green Steel Taxonomy, which is the first framework of its kind globally. It defines “green steel” based on the carbon emissions per tonne of finished steel (tfs), with a benchmark to classify finished steel on the percentage of its “greenness” within three categories based on how much lower a steel plant’s emission intensity is compared to a threshold of 2.2 t-CO2e/tfs. The taxonomy considers Scope 1 and 2, as well as limited Scope 3, emissions up to finished steel production, within its remit.
Green Public Procurement Policy: In the Roadmap and Action Plan, the Ministry of Steel acknowledged that a “green public procurement (GPP)” for the steel sector is a crucial policy lever to drive the decarbonization of the sector. GPP programs mandate government purchase of low-emissions intensity steel. A recent study found that a 26% green steel mandate for public projects could reduce CO₂ emissions by up to 20.9 million tonnes. Currently, there are no centralized GPP programs in the country, but policies to generate demand for steel have been implemented at the federal level. Recently, a ministry official stated that the government is finalizing a green steel procurement mandate, with nearly a quarter of procurement to be green steel.
The Indian steel sector is primarily impacted by domestic climate policies, but the European Union's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (EU CBAM) is a key policy measure from another region that is impacting the sector. The EU CBAM was approved by the European Commission in April 2023. Its core objective is to equalize the price of carbon between EU products and imports to ensure that imports from countries with lower carbon prices do not undermine EU industry subject to the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS). The European Commission has stated that the CBAM is compatible with World Trade Organization (WTO) guidelines. The CBAM is initially applicable to imports of the following goods: iron and steel, cement, aluminum, fertilizers, electricity, and hydrogen.
1Further analysis on world’s most important steelmakers’ positions on climate policies and regulations can be found on InfluenceMap’s Steel Platform
The Indian steel sector’s engagement with climate policy is partially aligned with policy pathways to achieve the temperature goals of the Paris Agreement. Under InfluenceMap’s assessment, SAIL and AM/NS India rank the highest of the companies assessed with a performance band of C+, while Tata Steel, JSW Steel and Jindal Steel Limited receive a performance band of C.2
Indian steel companies mostly provide high-level disclosures of their climate and energy policy engagement, listing policies they are engaged on, without disclosing detailed positions. While most Indian steelmakers are somewhat actively engaged on various climate policies, only Tata Steel and its subsidiaries demonstrate strategic engagement.3
The Indian Steel Association, which represents the interests of primary and secondary steelmakers in India, displays the most positive positions on science-aligned climate policy in comparison to industry associations in other regions, as assessed by InfluenceMap’s Steel Platform.
The Indian steel sector is engaged on a range of domestic and regional policies to decarbonize the sector, with varying levels of engagement.
InfluenceMap detected positions on the vehicle scrappage policy from all entities assessed as part of the briefing, except for Jindal Steel Limited. The positions detected herein are broadly supportive and are indicative of increasing the utilization of steel scrap in the production process to lower emissions. However, the positions noted do not clarify the production process for scrap utilization.
Tata Steel displays positive positions on the vehicle scrappage policy. For example, CEO TV Narendran appeared supportive of the policy, emphasizing its role in formalizing the steel scrap market and reducing the steel industry's carbon emissions, as per a September 2024 media statement.
JSW Steel’s advocacy on the vehicle scrappage policy appears generally positive, though engagement remains limited. For example, CEO Jayant Acharya appeared to support the policy, highlighting its role in accelerating decarbonization efforts, as per a September 2024 media statement.
AM/NS India strongly supports the vehicle scrappage policy. In its 2024 Climate Action Report, the company displayed strong support for the policy while advocating for increasing the availability of scrap further through shipbreaking.
SAIL displays top-level support for the vehicle scrappage policy. In an April 2025 interview, former Chairman Amarendu Prakash appeared supportive of vehicle scrappage regulations to support decarbonization.
The Indian Steel Association demonstrated high-level support for the vehicle scrappage policy on its corporate website, accessed in April 2026.
No position detected from Jindal Steel Limited.
The Indian steel sector shows minimal engagement with the National Green Hydrogen Mission, likely due to the policy being in a pilot phase until 2029-30.
Tata Steel CEO broadly supported the NGHM in a February 2024 X post.
AM/NS India strongly supported the policy in its 2024 Climate Action Report, highlighting its critical role in advancing decarbonization efforts. Chairman Aditya Mittal appeared broadly supportive of the policy in a November 2021 opinion piece.
The Indian Steel Association demonstrated strong support for the NGHM in a September 2021 LinkedIn post, without disclosing further details on its impact on the steel sector.
No position detected from JSW Steel, Jindal Steel Limited, and SAIL, despite SAIL being chosen as one of the three entities to participate in the pilot projects.
InfluenceMap has detected minimal public engagement by industry actors on India’s Green Steel Taxonomy. Of the engagements identified, positions appear to broadly confirm engagement and support for the policy, while providing limited details on positions.
Despite the critical role of a green public procurement policy in emissions reductions, advocacy from the Indian steel sector for a specialized policy is very limited.
Despite 60% of India’s total steel exports heading to the EU in 2024, Indian primary steelmakers show very limited engagement with the EU CBAM, with the exception of Tata Steel.
Older evidence from the entities indicates a lack of a clear, detailed position, with companies merely suggesting they have been closely monitoring EU policy developments. However, more recently, some entities have advocated for India to respond with its own carbon tax, without demonstrating a clear position on the EU CBAM.
Japanese and Korean steelmakers opposed the EU CBAM’s current level of ambition and also advocated for weakening domestic carbon pricing policies in their respective countries, between the years 2022-2024, when the policy was in a pilot transitional phase. As the current CBAM rules allow exemptions for EU importers if an equivalent-strength carbon price is paid during the production of the goods, weaker domestic carbon pricing could prevent Japanese and Korean steel from receiving this exemption. By contrast, Indian steelmakers showed notably less vocal opposition to the EU CBAM during the pilot transitional and implementation phases.
Advocacy from Japanese and Korean steelmakers also appears to threaten other domestic climate policies aiming to accelerate the development of carbon-neutral products, which would aid companies in meeting the EU CBAM requirements. By contrast, Indian steelmakers have consistently advocated government intervention to support their transition to the EU CBAM regime, most notably, by advocating for the EU CBAM to be aligned with India’s Carbon Credit Trading Scheme or proposing the implementation of a domestic carbon tax.
Further details on domestic carbon pricing policies and corporate engagement are available on InfluenceMap’s Japan and Korea platforms.
2Performance Band is a full measure of a company’s climate and energy policy engagement, accounting for both its own engagement and that of its industry associations.
3Engagement Intensity is an independent measure of how active a company or industry association is in its direct climate and energy policy engagement activities, regardless of its positions on climate policies. It provides a useful measure of the strategic importance an organization places on climate policy within its advocacy program.
In 2023, India updated its Business Responsibility and Sustainability Reporting (BRSR) guidelines, making it mandatory for the country’s top 1,000 listed companies to respond to 98 essential indicators (mandatory) and 42 leadership indicators (voluntary).4
Under "Principle 7: Businesses, when engaging in influencing public and regulatory policy, should do so in a manner that is responsible and transparent" companies are mandated to disclose the number of its trade and industry association affiliations (1.a) and list the top ten affiliations based on total members of the bodies (1.b). Following this, companies have the option to disclose "Details of public policy positions advocated by the entity," including the name of the policy, method of advocacy, whether the position is public, frequency of review of position, and a link to the position.
Aside from AM/NS India, all companies assessed have detailed the top ten industry association memberships as mandated under the BRSR framework.5 These disclosures have been assessed against InfluenceMap’s own analysis of companies and industry associations to understand their scope and completeness.
All steelmakers have attempted to disclose some of their direct climate and energy policy engagement activities either through the BRSR or separately in their corporate disclosures. However, it is important to note that these disclosures do not include any details on positions taken or links to direct consultations; rather, they provide high-level disclosures on specific climate policies on which the entities are engaging.
Despite the differences in quality and level of detailing in their disclosures, the Indian steel sector performs better than other Indian sectors assessed by InfluenceMap. Nearly half of entities from other sectors assessed on InfluenceMap’s India Platform fail to provide details on their advocacy through the BRSR, despite responding to other mandatory questions on industry association memberships. This indicates that the Indian steel sector is comparatively more transparent than its domestic peers.
The updated BRSR guidelines provide an excellent opportunity for companies to transparently disclose their climate and energy policy engagement activities, and the steel sector can take the initiative to make more detailed and complete disclosures through the BRSR to position itself as a positive actor in a drive to increase transparency within the region. Further information on best practice on corporate disclosures on climate and energy policy engagement can be found here.
4AM/NS India is not included in the top-1000 listed companies in India, hence, it is not legally mandated to fill out the BRSR.
5 While the BRSR mandates disclosure of top ten industry association memberships, a complete disclosure according to InfluenceMap’s methodology would entail disclosing all industry association memberships with details on indirect climate and energy policy engagement.
