Mitsubishi Research Institute 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	Mitsubishi Research Institute provides a high level of transparency on what climate-related measures it tries to influence. It explicitly lists a wide range of policy areas it engages on – including domestic emissions trading systems, renewable-energy feed-in-tariff schemes, biofuel rules, resource-circulation and plastics regulation, disaster-resilience measures and other proposals such as its “Recommendations for Achieving Carbon Neutrality by 2050” and the policy paper on the “Integrated Promotion of Energy Policy and Resource Circulation Policy.” The Institute also explains how it seeks to influence decision-makers, describing participation in competitive public tenders for research commissioned by government ministries, acting as secretariat for expert committees that shape climate policy and hosting workshops with the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and other bodies, thereby revealing both direct and indirect channels and naming METI and other government agencies as targets. Finally, it states the concrete objectives it pursues, such as achieving “early zero emissions of the power sector,” promoting “induction of strategic innovations,” and driving “behavioral changes on the demand side,” alongside advocacy for carbon pricing, sustainable finance and international collaboration to deliver Japan’s 2050 carbon-neutral goal. Together, these disclosures show clear identification of the policies addressed, the avenues used to reach policymakers and the specific outcomes sought, although the description of lobbying channels and targets is somewhat less detailed than for the other elements.	3

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Limited	Mitsubishi Research Institute discloses a broad sustainability oversight structure—“Our President is appointed as the Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO)…The Board of Directors oversees basic policies related to sustainability and the progress of periodic plans” —and makes a high-level pledge that its “engagement activities” will be conducted “in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.” This commitment to align policy engagement indicates some recognition that lobbying should be consistent with climate goals. However, the disclosure does not explain how lobbying activities are monitored, whether direct or through trade associations, nor does it identify a specific process, review cycle, or criteria for assessing alignment; the governance roles cited appear to cover overall sustainability rather than lobbying specifically. Consequently, while the public commitment signals limited governance, we found no evidence of a defined mechanism, audit, or named committee dedicated to overseeing or correcting climate-related lobbying practices.	1