Tyson Foods Inc

Sign up to access all our data and the evidence and analysis underlying our overall scores. Once you've created an account, we'll get in touch with further details:

Sign Up

Direct Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Moderate	Tyson Foods provides a moderate level of transparency on its climate-policy lobbying. It explicitly identifies two U.S. federal programmes it seeks to influence—the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) and the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP)—and explains that EQIP helps producers implement on-farm energy conservation while REAP offers loans and grants for renewable-energy and efficiency projects. The company states, "We request the National Chicken Council and the National Turkey Federation to lobby for EQIP" and that it also conducts "direct lobbying in support of the program," and similarly requests the same associations to lobby for REAP, demonstrating that it uses both indirect and direct methods. However, it does not reveal which legislators, agencies, or jurisdictions it approaches, nor whether this engagement takes the form of meetings, submissions, or correspondence. Tyson is clear about the outcomes it wants, asserting support for both EQIP and REAP "with no exceptions," but it does not set out additional, measurable policy changes or targets. Consequently, while the company does name specific policies and the broad results it seeks, limited detail about its lobbying channels and policymaker targets keeps the overall disclosure at a moderate level.	2

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
None	Tyson Foods does not disclose any governance process to ensure that its external engagement activities are consistent with its climate commitments. While the company explains that "Since a majority of our total GHG emissions are from Agricultural sources, we generally support policy developments and regulatory agendas such as Conservation Programs in the upcoming Farm Bill which provide mechanisms for farmers to receive funding to implement practices that reduce emissions," and that "we also work with NGOs and trade organizations to encourage the adoption of climate smart agricultural practices," it provides no details on who oversees, monitors, or enforces alignment of these engagements. The company also explicitly states that it has "No" public commitment to conduct its engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement "and we do not plan to have one in the next two years," and we found no evidence of an internal review process, oversight structure, or named individual responsible for governing its lobbying or policy advocacy.	0