Energy & Utilities · GB · shell.com
A written explanation for this grade has not been published yet. The criteria below show what the score rests on.
Not material to this category
Every pillar, criterion by criterion — with the rubric level behind each score.
Mixed record; some concerns exist, but severity, recency, or directness is unclear.
Some public labor or supply-chain reporting, but limited detail.
Some clear labor commitments exist, but they are narrow or weakly evidenced.
Shell is among the highest-rated Energy & Utilities brands we've scored so far.
You represent Shell? Corrections and new evidence are re-scored by the same methodology — write to privacy@ethica.cc
Some third-party indication exists, but it is limited or narrow.
Major recent environmental controversy or official sanction, with poor or no credible response.
No meaningful public environmental disclosure.
No meaningful public environmental targets or improvement commitments.
No credible independent environmental evidence found.
Mixed record; some concerns exist, but they are limited, indirect, or unclear.
Some clear policy commitments exist, but they are limited in scope or detail.
Some third-party evidence exists, but it is limited or narrow.
Minimal disclosure; broad statements without useful detail.
Serious or repeated ethical/regulatory concerns from credible sources.
Very basic or generic ethics statements only.
Weak, vague, or inconsistent responses to ethical concerns.
The grade says what the evidence shows; this says how much evidence stands behind it — five weighted dimensions.
A guardrail capped confidence at 55/100 — the evidence base is too thin or one-sided to score higher.