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
| Overall Assessment |
Analysis |
Score |
|
None
|
COSCO SHIPPING Development Co Ltd’s disclosures focus on ESG oversight rather than lobbying governance. While the company notes that “The Board of Directors bears the ultimate responsibility for COSCO Shipping Holdings' ESG strategy and performance, and the Risk Control Committee takes the lead in formulating the sustainable development strategies, objectives and management policies, and coordinating the resources for and implementation of sustainable development objectives,” we found no evidence of any governance process related to direct or indirect lobbying. The company does not disclose any policy or mechanism to monitor or align lobbying activities with its climate or sustainability objectives, nor does it identify a specific individual or formal body responsible for overseeing lobbying efforts.
View Sources
|
E
|
| Overall Assessment |
Analysis |
Score |
|
Limited
|
COSCO SHIPPING Development provides only limited insight into its climate-policy lobbying. It names two identifiable policy areas it has engaged on—the EU extension of carbon-pricing rules to shipping fuels and the specific “FuelEU Maritime” initiative—showing some clarity about the regulations under discussion. Its description of how it engages is sparse: the company notes participation in “国资委关于国有企业碳达峰、碳中和的相关调研” and a seminar titled “FuelEU Maritime & Carbon Tax from Policy, Analysis to Response,” but it does not spell out concrete mechanisms such as written submissions, bilateral meetings, or coalition letters, nor does it identify policymaker targets beyond the general reference to SASAC. Likewise, the outcomes it seeks remain high-level; the firm says it offered suggestions for “双碳政策的制定” and aims to “remove compliance obstacles” and pursue “equitable, reasonable, and practical strategies for global maritime decarbonization,” yet it stops short of articulating specific amendments, targets, or timelines it wants policymakers to adopt. Overall, the disclosures indicate some engagement but lack the detail needed to demonstrate strong transparency around its lobbying objectives and methods.
|
D
|