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
|
Mercer International Inc. has established clear oversight for climate-related risks and opportunities, with Board Committees—namely the Environmental, Health & Safety Committee, the Audit Committee, and the Human Resources Committee—that "provide oversight of climate-related issues and strategic guidance on our targets, strategy planning, third-party verification, climate-related incentives and progress," and with the Vice President, Sustainability and Innovation who "works closely with Mercer’s Environmental Managers, Environmental Coordinators and analysts ... to monitor and disclose on climate and nature-related issues including Mercer’s climate strategy, targets, progress and provide updates to Executive Management, the Board of Directors and relevant Committees on a quarterly basis." Despite this detailed climate governance framework, the company does not disclose any governance process for its lobbying activities, nor does it identify a policy, oversight body, or individual responsible for overseeing direct or indirect lobbying or ensuring alignment of these activities with its climate objectives.
View Sources
|
E
|
| Overall Assessment |
Analysis |
Score |
|
Limited
|
Mercer International Inc. provides only limited insight into its climate-related lobbying. It refers to indirect engagement “through our associations” and lists organisations such as the German Pulp and Paper Industry Association, the Forest Products Association of Canada and the Renewable Carbon Initiative, showing that it uses industry associations as a lobbying channel but it does not describe any meetings, letters, submissions or identify the government bodies it seeks to influence. The company does not name any climate policy, bill or regulation it has addressed; the initiatives it cites—“Wood Saves the Climate,” “Forestry for the Future,” and “Growing Forests, Growing a Future”—are promotional campaigns rather than governmental measures, so the actual policies lobbied remain unidentified. Likewise, its stated intentions are broad—e.g. to “advocate for regulations that sustain both our industry and the environment” and to promote sustainable wood use and biodiversity—without spelling out the specific legislative changes or quantitative targets it supports or opposes. As a result, while Mercer acknowledges advocacy activity, it falls short of clearly outlining which climate policies it engages on, how it seeks to influence decision-makers, and the concrete outcomes it pursues.
|
D
|