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 |
Comment |
Score |
| Comprehensive |
Fincantieri SpA demonstrates a very high degree of transparency around its climate-policy lobbying. It explicitly lists the individual European initiatives it works on – such as the Fit for 55 package (including the Emissions Trading System reform, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism and FuelEU Maritime), the Green Deal Industrial Plan’s Net-Zero Industry Act and Critical Raw Materials Act, and Italy’s Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan – making it clear which regulations it seeks to influence. The company also describes in detail how it conducts that engagement: an EU office in Brussels coordinates structured dialogue and participation in the regulatory drafting process with named institutions (the European Commission, Council, European Parliament and European Defence Agency), it chairs the maritime segment of an Industrial Alliance launched by the Commission, and it takes part in expert groups and institutional round tables at both national and EU level. Equally specific are the policy outcomes it pursues: it advocates that EU ETS auction revenues and FuelEU Maritime penalties be channelled into shipping-sector technology investments, calls for recognition of the need to integrate green technologies on complex vessels under the Net-Zero Industry Act, pushes for legislative incentives to accelerate sustainable maritime innovation, and supports measures to build out the supply chain for floating offshore wind power. By clearly naming the policies, explaining its engagement channels and partners, and articulating the concrete legislative changes it wants to see, the company provides comprehensive insight into its climate-related lobbying activities.
|
4
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Moderate |
Fincantieri discloses an internal process for managing policy engagement and indicates senior oversight, yet provides limited detail on how it tests the climate-alignment of those activities. The company states that “each year the corporate structures in charge of institutional relations propose to the Chief Executive Officer for approval a Strategic Plan … in which they identify the strategic objectives, plan the actions to be undertaken, define the targets and the verification and monitoring tools,” showing that lobbying plans are formally reviewed and monitored at CEO level. In response to a climate-specific question it explains that “the relationship and dialogue with communities and institutions is managed internally at the Group level, through the Public Affairs … and the Brussels Representative Office,” emphasising that these functions are intended “to ensure that your engagement activities are consistent with your overall climate change strategy.” The disclosure also notes that “Group relations at the European level are ensured by the European Union Office based in Brussels,” and that activities cover decarbonisation themes embedded in the EU Green Deal, suggesting the process applies to both direct lobbying and participation in associations. However, while Fincantieri references the preparation of “position papers always supported by a legal-regulatory, scientific and economic foundation” and its leadership in alliances such as the “Renewable and Low-Carbon Fuels Value Chain Industrial Alliance,” we found no evidence of a systematic review of trade-association positions, of criteria for correcting or exiting misaligned bodies, or of any publicly available lobbying-alignment report. The company also does not disclose board-level oversight or a named individual beyond the CEO sign-off, nor does it describe how climate considerations are embedded in the verification tools mentioned. This indicates a moderate governance framework with defined internal procedures and senior approval, but incomplete transparency on climate-alignment mechanisms and indirect lobbying management.
|
2
|