AGC Inc

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

Direct Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Strong	AGC Inc provides a solid level of transparency on its climate-related lobbying. It names two identifiable policy engagements: the introduction of solar thermal power generation in Chile and the promotion of energy-saving technologies in Brazilian chemical plants through conversion to the ion-exchange membrane process, each linked to potential use of bilateral credits or the Green Climate Fund. The company is also clear about how it lobbied, describing three separate rounds of direct meetings – in 2021 with policymakers on GHG reduction in glass manufacturing, in March 2020 with Chile’s Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Energy, and in February 2020 with Brazil’s Ministry of Environment and Ministry of Economy – giving both the mechanism (face-to-face meetings) and the specific governmental targets. Finally, it discloses the concrete outcomes it pursued: securing support programmes for glass-sector GHG reduction, obtaining governmental backing and climate-finance channels for solar thermal power in Chile, and driving policy acceptance and potential Green Climate Fund support for energy-saving technology in Brazil. While the company does not yet list more than two distinct climate policies and some other engagements remain at the level of broad aspirations, the information provided on these matters demonstrates strong overall transparency about its climate lobbying activities.	3

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Limited	AGC Inc. provides only limited insight into how it governs climate-related lobbying and policy advocacy. The company states that it will “participate in and support external organizations that demonstrate a positive attitude toward climate change,” explaining that it considers such participation “Licence to Operate,” which implies an intention to align its indirect engagements with its climate commitments. However, while the Sustainability Committee is described as “a decision-making organization for sustainability initiatives that meets four times a year” and is “chaired by the CEO” with reports elevated to the Board, the disclosures focus on internal climate strategy and greenhouse-gas management rather than on monitoring or managing lobbying activities. The narrative on external engagement does not outline any concrete procedures—such as systematic reviews of trade-association positions, escalation steps for misalignment, or designated oversight of lobbying—nor does it mention direct lobbying governance. Consequently, the company discloses a general alignment principle but does not provide a defined governance framework, responsible owner, or monitoring process for lobbying alignment.	1