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 |
|
Limited
|
K+S AG discloses that “the entire Board of Executive Directors is responsible for political influence issues, including lobbying,” with “political communication is handled by the corporate communications department” and “regulatory communications are handled by the internal legal department,” demonstrating a formal oversight structure for its lobbying activities. While the company affirms “We support the goals of the Paris Agreement on climate change” and expresses conviction that “climate neutrality can be achieved by 2050,” it does not describe any processes to ensure its lobbying is aligned with these climate commitments. When asked if it has a public commitment “to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” K+S AG replies “No, and we do not plan to have one in the next two years,” indicating there is no review, monitoring procedure, or criteria to manage either its direct lobbying or its trade association involvement against its climate goals. These disclosures reflect limited governance over its climate-related lobbying efforts, with clear assignment of responsibility but no mechanism to align or monitor those activities against climate objectives.
View Sources
|
1
|
| Overall Assessment |
Analysis |
Score |
|
Limited
|
K+S AG offers only limited transparency around its climate-related lobbying. It identifies one concrete policy engagement – its submission to the European Commission’s consultation on the “Guidelines on certain State aid measures in the context of the system for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading post-2021 (2020/C 317/04)” – but does not indicate whether it has lobbied on any other climate measures. The company explains the method and target of this engagement, noting that it “contributed to the public consultation of the European Commission on the draft EU ETS state aid guidelines,” yet it provides no information on additional channels, such as meetings, letters, or coalition activity. K+S is clear about what it wants from this single intervention, stating that “the potash industry must be included in the list of sectors affected by carbon leakage and eligible for state aid” and that electricity-price compensation should be maintained to avoid “the migration of production to locations outside the EU with higher CO2 emissions.” These statements reveal the desired outcome and the rationale behind it, but with only one policy and one lobbying mechanism disclosed, the overall picture of the company’s climate-policy advocacy remains fragmentary.
|
1
|