Lobbying Governance
| Overall Assessment | Analysis | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Strong |
Far EasTone Telecommunications discloses a defined process that links its climate-related lobbying to its overall Paris-aligned strategy and assigns clear oversight. It states that “before joining an association or participating in public policy and lobbying… one of the key points of the assessment is whether it can support the Paris Climate Agreement,” and that the evaluation “requires the approval of the highest executive of each business group and is reported to the President on a monthly basis,” demonstrating a formal review mechanism covering indirect and direct engagements. The company affirms that “FET’s public policy participation and lobbying, as well as the participation of public associations align with the Paris Agreement” and adds that “FET also lobbies for the Paris Climate Agreement and climate-related actions,” indicating that its own advocacy is expected to follow the same criteria. Since 2023 it has “started to investigate the positions of the public associations it has joined regarding the Paris Agreement,” identifying which bodies support or have yet to support the accord and noting that it is “currently in ongoing discussions” with those lacking a stated commitment, which shows an active alignment process for trade-association memberships. Oversight is further anchored at board level, as “FET ‘Risk Management Committee’ composed of the board of directors is the highest risk management unit… [and] under the Risk Management Committee, there is an ‘Environment and Energy Management Committee’, which is responsible for the promotion and implementation of climate change-related issues.” While the disclosure outlines governance, approval channels, and follow-up with misaligned associations, the company does not publish a standalone lobbying-alignment audit and has yet to detail concrete outcomes such as changes in membership or public correction of trade bodies, so transparency on the effectiveness of the process is limited. Overall, this indicates strong governance of both direct and indirect climate lobbying, backed by senior oversight and a defined alignment procedure, but lacking the depth of a publicly released audit or full reporting on corrective actions.
View Sources
|
B |