CK Hutchison Holdings Ltd

Lobbying Governance & Transparency

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:

Lobbying Governance
Overall Assessment Analysis Score
Moderate CK Hutchison Holdings Ltd demonstrates a moderate level of governance in relation to climate lobbying activities. The company has established a Climate Action Working Group, which includes senior representatives from operational companies (OpCos) and convenes regularly to ensure alignment between external engagement activities and its climate commitments. It is stated that "the Head of Sustainability also communicates to the senior CKHGT executives who in turn update the Governance Board of important strategy changes," indicating a structured approach to oversight. Furthermore, CKHGT ensures its climate positions are "communicated and reflected to the GSMA in an accurate and timely manner," showcasing efforts to align indirect lobbying through trade associations with its climate strategy. However, while the company outlines processes for monitoring and managing climate-related risks and opportunities, such as through its Sustainability Committee and Sustainability Working Group, there is no explicit mention of a comprehensive mechanism for auditing or reviewing the alignment of lobbying activities with climate goals. Additionally, while the governance framework includes oversight by senior executives and committees, the evidence does not detail specific actions taken to address misalignment in lobbying activities or trade association positions. The company does not disclose a dedicated lobbying audit or review process, nor does it provide evidence of engaging with or exiting associations whose positions conflict with its climate policy. This indicates that while there are governance structures in place, they are not fully comprehensive in addressing climate lobbying alignment.

View Sources

C
Lobbying Transparency
Overall Assessment Analysis Score
None No evidence found

E