Blog
BankTrack news
BankTrack blog
Partner news
Partner blog
Bank
BNP ParibasFrance
Active
This profile is actively maintained
Last update: 2024-12-17 00:00:00
BNP Paribas head office. Photo: Boubloub via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)
Active
This profile is actively maintained
Last update: 2024-12-17 00:00:00
Bank info
BankTrack campaigns
All
About
| Website | http://www.bnpparibas.com/en |
| Headquarters |
16, boulevard des Italiens
75009 Paris
France
|
| CEO/chair |
Jean-Laurent Bonnafé Director and CEO |
| Supervisor | |
| Ownership |
listed on NYSE
BNP Paribas' shareholder structure can be accessed here. |
| Subsidiaries |
BNP Paribas Fortis – Belgium (profile)
|
BNP Paribas is one of the main banks in Europe. It was created on 23 May 2000 through the merger of Banque Nationale de Paris (BNP) and Paribas. Together with Société Générale and Crédit Lyonnais it is one of the 'three old banks' of France. BNP Paribas is an universal bank and operates in three main business areas: retail banking, corporate investment banking and investment solutions.
Sustainability
Commitments
Policies
Voluntary standards
BNP Paribas 's most important sustainability commitments can be found at the website sections listed below.
BNP Paribas has committed itself to the following voluntary standards:
Dodgy Deals
BNP Paribas is linked to a number of companies and projects that BankTrack considers controversial (so called Dodgy Deals), e.g. as a current or past financier or through an expression of interest. The profiles below provide more details on the nature of BNP Paribas's link to these deals.
Projects / Companies
Finance type
Year
News
BankTrack
Partners
Blog
External
Resources
Documents
Links
Accountability
Grievances
Response
tracking
BNP Paribas has a whistleblowing channel, which allows external stakeholders to raise concerns, including those related to human rights.
Stakeholders may also raise complaints via the OECD National Contact Points (see OECD Watch guidance).
BNP Paribas is an Equator Principles signatory. While the Equator Principles have no official grievance mechanism, complaints relating to this bank's financing of Equator Principles projects can be filed through our own website www.equator-complaints.org.
This page evaluates BNP Paribas's responses to instances of alleged human rights violations linked to its finance, raised by civil society organisations. It is not intended to be exhaustive, but covers selected impacts raised by BankTrack and other civil society partners since 2016. For the full scoring methodology, see here. For more information about BankTrack's evaluation of bank responses to human rights impacts, see the 2021 report "Actions speak louder: assessing bank responses to human rights violations".
Impacts reviewed
Responded?
Total score
Response
Action
Monitoring
Banks and Dirty Diesel: Vitol and Trafigura (May 2017)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not publicly respond.
Following the bank's response: Although it responded, the bank required it to be kept confidential. As this is not a public response, the score remains unchanged.
Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action.
Following the bank's response: The bank has not provided any public information on its engagement with the company or whether it took any appropriate action, therefore the score remains unchanged.
Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Banks profiting from the construction and hotel boom in Qatar (November 2022)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded publicly but did not speak to the substance of the issues raised; rather, the bank notes that it "cannot provide any comment on the relations and dialogue we have with our clients", it took note that "the research focuses on the provision of loans, underwriting services and other credits, as well as investments in the share and bonds issued by the targeted companies, and does not distinguish which of these financial services are dedicated to activities in Qatar", and it referenced its relevant human rights policies and procedures. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank does not indicate whether it plans to engage or has already engaged its clients or investee companies on this issue. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information to indicate the bank is monitoring the actions of its clients, or actions it might itself have taken in response to the impacts raised. More info
Deforestation in the Amazon (July 2019)
0.5
0
0.5
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded providing details of its policies related to the sector, but it did not acknowledge its link to the impact or comment on or respond to the substance of the issues raised.
Following the bank's response: The score remains unchanged as the required elements of the response are not present.
Action
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank does not detail whether or how it has engaged with its clients in the sector, nor whether it took appropriate action in the specific case that was raised.
The bank's response stated that in 2021 it revised its Agriculture sector policy, resulting in it only providing financial products or services to companies with a strategy to achieve zero deforestation in their production and supply chains by 2025 at the latest. This constitutes evidence that the bank has reviewed its management systems to prevent such impacts from occuring in the future. However this is not considered an appropriate and sufficient remedy by rights-holders involved in raising the issue with the bank as the policy does not include the commitments requested by them in the report; therefore it receives a half score.
Following the response: The bank's score was amended to 0.5.
Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress.
Following the bank's response: The bank has not provided details on how it monitored the progress of specific companies or how the bank monitored the impact on rights-holders involved in raising the issue with the bank of its own action of updating the Agriculture sector policy. Therefore, the score remains unchanged.
More info
Don't Buy into Occupation report (November 2022)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded publicly but without acknowledging the bank's link to the impact. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank provides no information on whether it has engaged with its clients or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank provided no information to indicate it is monitoring the actions of its clients, or actions it might itself have taken in response to the impacts raised. More info
Drummond and paramilitary violence in Colombia (May 2016)
2
1
1
0
Response
1
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded acknowledging its link to the company and commenting on and responding to the specific issues raised. The bank provided detailed information regarding its decision to stop providing finance to the company after its due diligence "flagged the company for ongoing ESG (including human rights) controversies". Action
1
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank stated that after financing Drummond in 2010, it declined to provide further finance in 2012, and decided in 2014 not to provide financial service to the company until further notice, due to "ongoing ESG (including human rights controversies". This is considered as appropriate action taken by the bank itself. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on there the bank monitored the impacts or the actions of its clients More info
East African Crude Oil Pipeline (March 2021)
1
0.5
0.5
0
Response
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
BNP Paribas confirmed in January 2020 that it was not involved in the project. It did not comment on whether it may become involved in the project in future. This is sufficient for a half score. Following media reporting: News sources subsequently reported that the bank will not finance the project, however, the bank has not responded to stakeholders or confirmed its position publicly, so there is no change in score.
Action
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank confirmed it was not financing the project, although it did not provide detail on its future position. This is credited with a half score. Following media reporting: Media reports suggest the bank has taken appropriate action by refusing to provide finance to the project, however, the bank has not set this position out publicly, so there is no change in score.
Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored measures taken by its client to address the impacts associated with the project. Finance for JBS and links to deforestation in the Brazilian Amazon (March 2023)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded citing client confidentiality saying it "cannot comment the data linked to our clients". The bank provided a list of its applicable policies but failed to acknowledge a link to the company or impacts raised. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. The bank mentions it has "ongoing dialogue" with its clients on the issue of deforestation more broadly, but it is not clear the bank has engaged JBS specifically on the impacts raised. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Myanmar: Equity exposure to companies linked to the military regime (October 2021)
1.5
1
0.5
0
Response
1
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded by providing an overview of its policies, acknowledging the existence of links with some companies listed. Action
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly explains its compliance with ESG policies and with the international sanctions imposed. The bank states whether it engaged directly with companies by either entering into dialogue, scoring the companies or excluding them. Nonetheless the bank does not set out what specific actions they have sought from those companies. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available about whether the bank monitored progress. More info
UN human rights complaint regarding Saudi Aramco and its financiers (July 2023)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded publicly but it did not acknowledge a link to the impacts raised or to the company in question. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not provide information on whether it has engaged with its client or took appropriate action on the impacts raised. In its response, the bank outlined its approach to climate change and human rights more broadly. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Don't Buy into Occupation report (September 2021)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not respond publicly. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress.
Following the bank's response: The bank has not provided details on how it monitored the progress of specific companies or how the bank monitored the impact on rights-holders involved in raising the issue with the bank of its own action of updating the Agriculture sector policy. Therefore, the score remains unchanged.
More info
ArcelorMittal steel impacts (June 2024)
1
0.5
0.5
n/a
Response
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded publicly acknowledging that ArcelorMittal is a client of theirs, but without speaking to the substance of the issues raised. Action
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank stated that it has engaged with ArcelorMittal on the impacts raised. However, it did not set out how it has exercised its leverage or taken any further steps to address the impacts. Monitoring
n/a
Rationale for score
The impact was not raised over a year ago and therefore is not scored on monitoring progress. More info
JSW Utkal steel and coal, India (February 2025)
0
0
0
n/a
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded, stating: "for confidentiality reasons we do not communicate on our relationship with companies beyond what is already public." Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank stated that the information we provided "is very valuable in the framework of the engagement dialogue we have with our clients." However, no information is available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
n/a
Rationale for score
The impact was not raised over a year ago and therefore is not scored on monitoring progress. More info
Impacts of Indonesia’s state electricity company PLN (March 2025)
0
0
0
n/a
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded, stating: "For banking confidentiality reasons, we are not able to comment on our current relationship with any specific company, regardless of them being our clients or not." Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information is available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
n/a
Rationale for score
The impact was not raised over a year ago and therefore is not scored on monitoring progress. More info
See the letter BankTrack sent the bank here.
Average
85%
0.46
0.23
0.23
0
Banks and Climate
Banks and Climate
The 2025 Banking on Climate Chaos report showed that BNP Paribas provided $66.5 bn in financing to the fossil fuel industry between 2021 and 2024. In 2024 only, PNC provided $14.1 bn, including $5.9 bn for oil, gas and coal companies expanding fossil fuels. Find further details on BNP Paribas' fossil fuel portfolio and how it compares to other large banks globally on the Banking on Climate Chaos website below.
Partner organisation Reclaim Finance tracks the coal, oil and gas policies of financial institutions, including banks, in their Coal Policy Tool (CPT) and the Oil and Gas Policy Tracker (OGPT). BankTrack works closely with Reclaim Finance and endorses their policy assessments. Find further details on their assessment of BNP Paribas’ fossil fuel policy below.
False Solutions Tracker
BankLast update
Country
Wind Energy
Solar Energy
Geothermal Energy
Ocean Energy
Energy grids and storage
Hydropower
Hydrogen
Solid Biomass
Biofuels
CCUS
Nuclear Power
Details
Explanation
The purpose of the False Solutions Tracker is to give a clear overview of energy technologies that fall under banks' individual sustainable finance commitments. The tracker lists 11 energy technologies that are usually associated with the energy transition and the decarbonisation of the economy. These technologies are defined here and classified in three categories:
-
Real solutions: Technologies that deliver on a Just Transition towards Energy Democracy. BankTrack considers these technologies as real solutions only if and when they do deliver Energy Democracy.
-
Solutions under strict conditions: Energy technologies that could be real solutions if they deliver on a Just Transition towards Energy Democracy but that could also be false solutions. This is the case of hydrogen and hydropower. On one hand, fossil-free and green hydrogen could be a real solution under certain conditions. However, fossil-based hydrogen and nuclear hydrogen are always false solutions. On the other hand, hydropower lifespan extension could also be a real solution under strict conditions while hydropower expansion is a false solution.
-
False solutions: Energy technologies that are not aligned with a just transition towards Energy Democracy.
For each one of the 11 energy technologies, the tracker indicates if it is included in bank's individual sustainable finance commitments:
For Real solutions:
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting, but under certain conditions. In this case, those conditions are mentioned in the "relevant policy document" section for each bank.
- : No, the bank does not include its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : It is unclear whether the bank includes or not its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
For solutions under strict conditions and for false solutions:
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting, but under certain conditions. In this case, those conditions are mentioned in the "relevant policy document" section for each bank.
- : No, the bank does not include its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : It is unclear whether the bank includes or not its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
False Solutions Tracker expansion
BankLast update
Country
Wind Energy
Solar Energy
Geothermal Energy
Ocean Energy
Energy grids and storage
Hydropower
Hydrogen
Solid Biomass
Biofuels
CCUS
Nuclear Power
Details
Explanation
The purpose of the False Solutions Tracker is to give a clear overview of energy technologies that fall under banks' individual sustainable finance commitments. The tracker lists 11 energy technologies that are usually associated with the energy transition and the decarbonisation of the economy. These technologies are defined here and classified in three categories:
-
Real solutions: Technologies that deliver on a Just Transition towards Energy Democracy. BankTrack considers these technologies as real solutions only if and when they do deliver Energy Democracy.
-
Solutions under strict conditions: Energy technologies that could be real solutions if they deliver on a Just Transition towards Energy Democracy but that could also be false solutions. This is the case of hydrogen and hydropower. On one hand, fossil-free and green hydrogen could be a real solution under certain conditions. However, fossil-based hydrogen and nuclear hydrogen are always false solutions. On the other hand, hydropower lifespan extension could also be a real solution under strict conditions while hydropower expansion is a false solution.
-
False solutions: Energy technologies that are not aligned with a just transition towards Energy Democracy.
For each one of the 11 energy technologies, the tracker indicates if it is included in bank's individual sustainable finance commitments:
For Real solutions:
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting, but under certain conditions. In this case, those conditions are mentioned in the "relevant policy document" section for each bank.
- : No, the bank does not include its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : It is unclear whether the bank includes or not its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
For solutions under strict conditions and for false solutions:
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting, but under certain conditions. In this case, those conditions are mentioned in the "relevant policy document" section for each bank.
- : No, the bank does not include its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : It is unclear whether the bank includes or not its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
For more details see this page.
Banks and Human Rights
Banks and Human Rights
BankTrack assessed BNP Paribas in its 2024 Global Human Rights Benchmark, where it achieved 8.5 points out of 15 and was ranked as a “moderate achiever”.
The bank scored 0.5 out of 3 points on the new “specific rights indicators”, which assess how banks address human rights defenders, Indigenous Peoples’ right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent and environmental rights in their policies and practices.
In addition, BNP Paribas scored 0.55 out of 3 on how it responds to alleged human rights violations linked to its finance, which were raised by civil society organisations. More information is detailed in the "Accountability" section of this profile.
The table below shows BankTrack's assessment of how BNP Paribas has implemented the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Please click on 'expand all details' and 'explanation' for further information on the methodology.
Our policy assessments are always a work in progress. We very much welcome any feedback, especially from banks included in the assessments. Please get in touch at humanrights@banktrack.org.
Global Human Rights Benchmark 2022
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
BNP Paribas
FRA
7.5
Front runner
7.5
0
Explanation
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 3 points
3.5 - 6.5 points
7 - 10 points
10.5 - 14 points
For more details see this page.
Global Human Rights Benchmark 2024
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
BNP Paribas
FRA
8.5
Moderate achiever
8.5
0
Explanation
Laggard
Follower
Moderate achiever
Leader
0 - 3 points
3.5 - 7 points
7.5 - 10.5 points
11 - 15 points
For more details see this page.
Banks and Nature
Banks and Nature
BNP Paribas’ policies for forest-risk sectors (beef, soy, palm oil, pulp and paper, rubber and timber) have been assessed by the Forests & Finance coalition, achieving an overall score of 4.2 out of 10 and ranking it as a front runner. BNP Paribas achieved a score of 5.7 out of 10 specifically for its policies related to the beef sector and 6.1 out of 10 for its policies related to the palm oil sector. In addition, BankTrack and the Environmental Paper Network have assessed BNP Paribas’ policies related to the pulp and paper sector.
Between 2016 and 2022, BNP Paribas provided USD 5,682 million in credit to companies operating in these forest-risk sectors and held investments amounting to USD 24 million as of 2022.
BankTrack has also assessed BNP Paribas' policies related to the wood biomass sector and found that biomass is not mentioned in its policies and no safeguards or exclusions are in place for wood biomass. For more information, see the links below.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Overall scores
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its policies. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Beef
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its beef policy. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Palm Oil
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its palm oil policy. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Tracking the NZBA
Tracking the Net Zero Banking Alliance
BNP Paribas is a member of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) and has therefore committed to reduce its financed emissions to net zero by 2050; within 18 months of joining the alliance set interim targets for 2030 (or sooner) for high emission priority sectors, and within 36 months set further sector targets; set new intermediary targets every 5 years from 2030 onwards; annually publish data on emissions and progress against a transition strategy including climate-related sectoral policies; and take a robust approach to the role of offsets in transition plans. BankTrack track's implementation of these commitments in the NZBA compliance tracker.
Banks and Russia
Banks and Russian Aggression in Ukraine
BankTrack is keeping track of the public response of BNP Paribas to Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. BNP Paribas publicly condemned the war. BNP Paribas is considered by Leave-Russia.org to be "suspended" its operations in Russia. We categorise its exposure to Russia as moderate, with over $3.3 billion of financial assets. BNP Paribas supports the Russian fossil fuel industry through investments, loans, and underwriting. For further details, see the table linked below.
Banks and Steel
Banks and Steel
As part of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), BNP Paribas is required to set interim targets for 2030 for high emission priority sectors. For BNP Paribas, this includes its lending to the steel sector. You can see BNP Paribas’s iron and steel decarbonisation targets, and its progress towards meeting them in our NZBA steel targets compliance tracker:
Partner organisation Reclaim Finance’s 2023 report on metallurgical coal financing showed that BNP Paribas provided US$ 4.4 billion in loans and underwriting to developers of new metallurgical coal between 2016 and 2022. Find further details on BNP Paribas’s metallurgical coal financing and and how it compares to other large banks globally in the report.
Reclaim Finance also tracks the metallurgical coal policies of financial institutions, including banks, in their Coal Policy Tool. BankTrack works closely with Reclaim Finance and endorses their policy assessments. Find further details on their assessment of BNP Paribas metallurgical coal policy below.
According to a reportby Reclaim Finance, between 2016 and June 2023, BNP Paribas provided $9.3 billion in finance to the fossil-steel industry, making it the 9th largest financier worldwide. Find further details on BNP Paribas' steel financing and how it compares to other large banks globally in the report.
Good Moves
Good moves
Year:
2024
2021
2019
2017
2015
Send feedback
on this profile