Lobbying Governance
| Overall Assessment | Analysis | Score |
|---|---|---|
| None |
No evidence found
View Sources
|
E |
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 |
No evidence found
View Sources
|
E |
| Overall Assessment | Analysis | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Limited |
Südzucker AG provides very limited insight into its climate-related lobbying. The company notes that it takes part in “political dialogue and committee meetings” and that it is a member of industry associations such as CEFS and ePURE, which implies an indirect lobbying channel, but it does not name the public bodies, ministries, or individual decision makers it tries to influence, nor does it describe any direct engagement tools like position letters or consultation responses. No specific climate policies, bills, or regulations are identified; the disclosure only references broad frameworks such as the Paris Agreement and the European Green Deal without indicating that the company has actually lobbied on them. Likewise, while Südzucker outlines internal climate objectives (e.g., climate-neutral operations by 2050 and a 50.4 % reduction in Scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2030), it does not link these ambitions to any concrete legislative changes it seeks to secure through advocacy. As a result, the company’s transparency is confined to acknowledging that it is registered on EU and German lobbying registers and belongs to trade associations, leaving stakeholders with minimal visibility into what climate policies it tries to influence, how, or to what end.
|
D |