Direct Lobbying Transparency
| Overall Assessment | Comment | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Strong | Gazprom Neft provides a relatively detailed picture of its climate-policy lobbying. It names several concrete instruments it has helped shape, including the “Paris Agreement” (where it submitted proposals on forest-climatic initiatives and non-market approaches), the Russian “draft Federal Law on limiting greenhouse gas emissions,” the development of a “state regulatory document of the Russian Federation on estimating greenhouse gas emissions,” and work on carbon-tax-related regulations covering free credits, CO₂-intensity benchmarks and monitoring rules. The company also discloses multiple engagement methods: it “took part in the consideration of the draft… and sent comments and suggestions for its improvement to the originators,” collaborated with the Ministry of Energy to align emissions-estimation methodologies, and participates in wider state programmes and international discussions, thereby giving insight into both direct submissions and collaborative policy design. While it does not identify the responsible officials in every case, it does at least specify key targets such as the draft law’s “originators” and the Russian Ministry of Energy. The desired outcomes are set out with unusual specificity, ranging from supporting the draft law “in the presented version,” pushing for “the harmonization of estimation principles with the best international practices,” and advocating to “prohibit climate protectionism,” “eliminate discrimination in international trade,” create unified international climate-coordination infrastructure, and secure detailed procedures for free credits and emissions-monitoring. Taken together, these disclosures demonstrate a strong level of transparency on the policies engaged, the channels used, and the concrete results the company is pursuing. | 3 |