Lobbying Governance
| Overall Assessment | Analysis | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Moderate |
Allegion discloses that “there are several processes in place to ensure that our direct and indirect activities that influence policy are consistent with our overall climate change strategy,” and identifies “the corporate ESG Council that includes members from…communications, investor relations, environmental, health & safety, global integrated supply chain, engineering, legal, and senior leadership” as the body charged with this oversight, indicating both a policy intention and a named multi-function governance forum responsible for reviewing lobbying alignment. This demonstrates that some internal mechanism exists and that a specific committee oversees the issue, which signals moderate governance. However, the disclosure stops at a high-level description; it does not explain how the Council evaluates positions, what criteria are used, whether findings are reported, or how trade-association stances are corrected or escalated. The company simply notes that “the indirect activities that influence external policy includes our involvement in trade associations…NAM and MAPI” without describing any assessment of those associations’ climate positions, and it also states that it has “No” public commitment to conduct engagement in line with the Paris Agreement. Consequently, while the presence of the ESG Council provides evidence of oversight, the lack of detail on monitoring procedures, alignment testing, corrective actions, or public reporting limits the strength and transparency of Allegion’s climate-lobbying governance.
View Sources
|
C |