Whose views count? Business influence and the European Commission’s High Level Groups

The report finds that the majority of the seven examined High Level Groups are either corporate-controlled or unbalanced in favor of industry, leading to policy recommendations that prioritize industrial competitiveness over environmental and social standards. It highlights a lack of democratic legitimacy and inconsistent transparency, calling for the dissolution of industry-controlled groups and the establishment of more equitable consultation mechanisms.

• The composition of most High Level Groups (HLGs) is skewed toward industry; two of the seven groups are 'corporate controlled' (over half of all members are industry representatives) and four are 'unbalanced in favour of industry' (industry makes up over 50% of non-government members).
• Policy recommendations from the HLGs on Textiles and Clothing and CARS 21 are described as reflecting an industry agenda, utilizing a market-oriented approach that disregards or waters down environmental and social standards to favor competitiveness.
• The HLG on Competitiveness, Energy and Environment showed an industry bias by emphasizing technological solutions and endorsing a 20% greenhouse gas emission reduction target by 2020, which the report notes is below the scientifically needed range of 25-40 percent.
• In the Pharmaceutical Forum, while the overall membership was more balanced, industry interests dominated critical areas such as information to patients, leading to proposals that would weaken the ban on direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription drugs.
• The HLG on the Competitiveness of the Agro-Food Industry is noted for excluding environmental interests entirely, with its progress report favoring industry-led proposals on GMOs, such as speeding up approval processes and establishing tolerance thresholds for non-EU authorized GMOs.
• The HLG of Independent Stakeholders on Administrative Burdens is corporate-controlled and focuses exclusively on reducing burdens for companies, which the report argues may compromise corporate accountability and social/environmental standards.
• Transparency levels among the HLGs are inconsistent; while membership and reports are generally available, minutes are only published for some groups, and the European Commission's register of Expert Groups is described as incorrect and outdated.
• The European Parliament has refused to participate in HLGs established since February 2006, asserting that these groups undermine the independence of EU institutions by pre-determining positions on critical issues.

APA

Pohl, C. (n.d.). Whose views count? Business influence and the European Commission’s High Level Groups. Friends of the Earth International. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Who-s_views_count.pdf

Chicago

Pohl, Christine. Whose views count? Business influence and the European Commission’s High Level Groups. Friends of the Earth International, n.d. https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Who-s_views_count.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Pohl |first1=Christine |title=Whose views count? Business influence and the European Commission’s High Level Groups |publisher=Friends of the Earth International |url=https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Who-s_views_count.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{pohlndwhose, author = {Pohl, Christine}, title = {{Whose views count? Business influence and the European Commission’s High Level Groups}}, institution = {Friends of the Earth International}, url = {https://www.foei.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Who-s_views_count.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }