Climate Lobbying Index

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
Limited	MDU Resources provides only limited insight into how it governs its policy engagement. The disclosure notes that its “Communications and Public Affairs Department … actively monitors, tracks and testifies on legislation affecting our business interests, and spends approximately $250,000 per year on lobbying efforts,” and that the department “works closely with state and national trade associations, various state chamber of commerce organizations and other industry groups that share the corporation’s position on issues of interest.” Oversight is referenced principally for political contributions rather than for lobbying alignment: “MDU Resources’ Board of Directors receives an annual report on the Good Government Fund contributions,” and “The Good Government Fund board of directors reviews all contribution recommendations.” These statements indicate an internal review step for PAC spending but do not extend to a process for assessing whether either direct or trade-association lobbying aligns with the company’s climate or broader sustainability objectives. The company does not disclose any procedures for monitoring climate-related lobbying positions, does not identify a board committee or executive responsible for ensuring alignment, and offers no evidence of auditing or adjusting trade-association memberships. Consequently, while a minimal oversight mechanism is described, the governance framework for lobbying—especially climate lobbying—remains largely undefined and lacks transparency about monitoring, alignment criteria, or accountability beyond PAC contributions. View Sources	1

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Limited

MDU Resources provides only limited insight into how it governs its policy engagement. The disclosure notes that its “Communications and Public Affairs Department … actively monitors, tracks and testifies on legislation affecting our business interests, and spends approximately $250,000 per year on lobbying efforts,” and that the department “works closely with state and national trade associations, various state chamber of commerce organizations and other industry groups that share the corporation’s position on issues of interest.” Oversight is referenced principally for political contributions rather than for lobbying alignment: “MDU Resources’ Board of Directors receives an annual report on the Good Government Fund contributions,” and “The Good Government Fund board of directors reviews all contribution recommendations.” These statements indicate an internal review step for PAC spending but do not extend to a process for assessing whether either direct or trade-association lobbying aligns with the company’s climate or broader sustainability objectives. The company does not disclose any procedures for monitoring climate-related lobbying positions, does not identify a board committee or executive responsible for ensuring alignment, and offers no evidence of auditing or adjusting trade-association memberships. Consequently, while a minimal oversight mechanism is described, the governance framework for lobbying—especially climate lobbying—remains largely undefined and lacks transparency about monitoring, alignment criteria, or accountability beyond PAC contributions.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	MDU Resources offers only limited insight into its climate-related lobbying. It names broad areas of engagement, such as renewable energy and energy-efficiency programmes, but does not cite any specific bills, regulations or jurisdictions, so readers cannot see exactly which policies it seeks to influence. The company does describe how it lobbies, noting that “MDU Resources’ Communications and Public Affairs Department provides public affairs and lobbying services for the company and its subsidiaries” and that it collaborates with trade associations and chambers of commerce while allocating about $250,000 annually to these activities, yet it does not identify the particular government bodies or individual officials it approaches. Likewise, the company outlines operational goals—such as reducing methane emissions and expanding renewable natural gas offerings—without linking these ambitions to concrete legislative or regulatory outcomes it is advocating for. Taken together, the disclosures show awareness of climate-policy engagement but fall short of detailing the specific policies, targets and results sought, leaving overall transparency at a basic level.	1

MDU Resources Group Inc

Lobbying Transparency and Governance