Comparative study reveals emissions intensity trends and climate governance differences in Chinese and Russian oil companies, suggesting policy improvements.
In the context of the global energy transition and a strengthening climate agenda, this study provides a comparative assessment of sustainable development strategies adopted by leading national oil and gas companies in China and Russia, focusing on their contribution to decarbonisation and SDG 7 and SDG 13. The study combines content analysis of corporate ESG reporting with a quantitative assessment of key environmental indicators. The analysis covers Gazprom, Rosneft, Lukoil, Novatek and Tatneft (Russia), and CNPC (PetroChina), Sinopec and CNOOC (China) over 2020–2024. The quantitative assessment includes Scope 1–2 greenhouse gas emissions, emissions intensity per unit of energy produced, operational energy consumption, renewable energy share, water intensity and green capital expenditures. The results reveal differences in national adaptation models: Chinese companies follow a centralised, state-driven approach integrated into strategic planning and five-year programmes, while Russian companies demonstrate a more fragmented, corporate-oriented model focused on technological modernisation. The strongest divergence is observed in governance integration and low-carbon investment structures, while emissions intensity trends remain gradual in both cases. Based on these findings, recommendations are proposed to strengthen sustainability and climate governance in Russian and Chinese oil and gas companies. The findings rely on self-reported ESG data, which involve differences in reporting boundaries and calculation methodologies.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cherepovitsyn et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: