ExxonMobil received the Environmental, Social and Governance Leader of the Year award at African Energy Week 2025, recognized for its commitment to advancing STEM education in Africa. The recognition comes as the oil major expands both its educational initiatives and fossil fuel operations across the continent, creating a complex picture of corporate engagement that supporters call transformative and critics might view as strategic positioning.
The award specifically honors ExxonMobil’s STEM Africa program, which brought students from Angola, Namibia, Nigeria and Mozambique to showcase sustainable STEM solutions at the conference finals. Launched in 2024 by the ExxonMobil Foundation in partnership with Junior Achievement Africa, the initiative has reportedly reached more than 3,000 students and educators across these four countries.
The programme focuses on building science, technology, engineering, and mathematics skills, aiming to inspire young Africans toward technical careers critical to the continent’s energy and technology sectors. According to ExxonMobil, 96% of students who participated expressed interest in STEM related professions, suggesting the initiative resonates with participants seeking pathways into technical fields.
Teacher training programmes complement the student focus, designed to strengthen local education systems and promote long term knowledge transfer. That’s arguably where sustainable impact gets built: not just inspiring individual students, but developing institutional capacity that persists after corporate programmes wind down.
Beyond its educational work, ExxonMobil continues expanding oil and gas operations across Africa. The company is advancing deepwater oil projects in Nigeria and Angola, leading frontier exploration in Namibia’s Walvis Basin, and developing the Rovuma LNG project in Mozambique. The Mozambique project reportedly incorporates carbon reduction technology and local engineer training programmes.
NJ Ayuk, Executive Chairman of the African Energy Chamber, praised the company’s approach, stating that ExxonMobil’s impact extends beyond production volumes to empowering people and communities. He emphasized that the STEM Africa program builds a skilled workforce for Africa’s future energy development.
That framing positions oil and gas extraction as compatible with, even necessary for, African development. It’s a narrative the industry has been refining as global pressure mounts for energy transition away from fossil fuels. Whether training African engineers to work in hydrocarbon industries represents sustainable development or locks the continent into carbon intensive pathways depends largely on your perspective about energy futures.
The timing of this award is interesting given ExxonMobil’s complicated relationship with ESG metrics and climate activism. The company has faced sustained criticism over its historical role in climate change denial and ongoing resistance to aggressive emissions reduction targets. In 2024, ExxonMobil filed lawsuits against activist shareholders attempting to submit climate focused proposals, seeking to block efforts that would require the company to ramp up emissions reduction efforts and set scope 3 targets similar to its peers.
Those legal battles sit uncomfortably alongside ESG leadership awards, creating a disconnect between corporate recognition for social programmes and resistance to environmental accountability measures. It’s possible to do good work on education while simultaneously fighting climate action requirements; corporations contain multitudes, and their ESG strategies often emphasize strengths while minimizing weaknesses.
Critics, including the Union of Concerned Scientists, have described ExxonMobil’s climate reporting as propaganda dressed up as science, suggesting the company’s sustainability claims warrant skepticism. That doesn’t necessarily invalidate the STEM Africa program’s educational value, but it does complicate the narrative of comprehensive ESG leadership.
The African Energy Chamber, which presented the award, has positioned itself as a strong advocate for continued fossil fuel development on the continent, arguing that African nations shouldn’t sacrifice energy access and economic development to satisfy Western climate concerns. That perspective aligns naturally with ExxonMobil’s business interests, which might explain why the company receives recognition here while facing criticism elsewhere.
None of this means the STEM programme lacks value. If 3,000 students gained technical skills and educational opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise have accessed, that’s meaningful regardless of the provider’s motivations or broader business practices. The question is whether such initiatives represent genuine commitment to African development or strategic investments in social license to continue fossil fuel extraction.
ExxonMobil’s integrated ESG strategy, as described by the company, combines community development, innovation, and environmental responsibility. The education programs clearly address community development. The environmental responsibility component is where things get contentious, given the company’s core business involves extracting and selling products that, when burned, drive climate change.
The company argues it can pursue both fossil fuel production and carbon reduction technology simultaneously, developing CCS (carbon capture and storage) systems and other mitigation approaches while maintaining hydrocarbon output. Climate activists generally view this as inadequate, arguing that real environmental leadership requires dramatically scaling back fossil fuel production rather than attempting to marginally reduce its impacts.
For African nations hosting ExxonMobil operations, the calculation involves weighing immediate economic benefits and skill development against long term climate risks and potential lock in to fossil fuel dependency. Countries like Namibia and Mozambique see these projects as opportunities for economic transformation and revenue generation. Environmental advocates worry they’re betting on technologies and markets that may become stranded assets as global energy transition accelerates.
The STEM Africa program, whatever its corporate motivations, does address a real gap. Africa faces genuine shortages of technical skills in engineering, technology, and sciences. Building that capacity makes sense whether it’s funded by oil companies, tech firms, or development agencies. The students gaining skills and inspiration won’t care much about the funding source if it genuinely opens career pathways.
What’s worth examining is whether these educational investments create professionals equipped to build renewable energy systems and climate resilient infrastructure, or primarily train workers for hydrocarbon industries. The programme materials emphasize STEM broadly, not specifically petroleum engineering, which suggests some flexibility in how participants might apply their skills.
The award itself reflects the African Energy Chamber’s priorities and perspective on energy development. It’s an industry organization advocating for continued fossil fuel investment in Africa, so recognizing an oil major for ESG leadership makes internal sense within that framework. Whether that perspective represents Africa’s best interests or primarily serves extractive industries operating on the continent is hotly debated.
ExxonMobil’s African operations involve billions in investment, thousands of jobs, and significant revenue flows to host governments. Those economic impacts matter, particularly for countries struggling with poverty and infrastructure deficits. Whether the trade offs, including environmental degradation, community disruption, and climate impacts, justify those benefits varies by location and who’s doing the evaluation.
The company’s stated commitment to responsible operations and community investment should be measured against actual outcomes over time. Do local communities genuinely benefit from these projects, or do they bear costs while profits flow elsewhere? Are environmental promises kept, or do they get compromised when they conflict with production targets? Does skills training create lasting opportunity, or does it evaporate when projects end?
Those questions can’t be answered at award ceremonies. They require sustained monitoring, independent evaluation, and willingness to acknowledge both successes and failures. Corporate ESG reporting tends toward the former and away from the latter, which is why external verification matters.
For now, ExxonMobil can add ESG Leader of the Year to its recognition collection while continuing to navigate the tensions between its educational initiatives, operational expansion, and climate accountability challenges. Whether that award reflects genuine leadership or successful strategic positioning depends substantially on whether you believe Africa’s energy future lies primarily in fossil fuel development or renewable transition, and whether you think oil companies can legitimately lead on environmental and social governance while their core business drives emissions.
The 3,000 students who’ve participated in STEM Africa probably don’t spend much time pondering those contradictions. They’re focused on skills, opportunities, and career possibilities that may not have existed otherwise. That’s real impact, whatever the broader corporate context. Whether it adds up to ESG leadership or something more complicated is a question worth asking, even if the answer remains contested.