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
|
Renesas Electronics discloses only a high-level commitment to align its external engagement with the Paris Agreement, stating that it "has a public commitment or position statement to conduct [its] engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement" and reiterating that "we have set the GHG reduction target in line with 1.5 °C". While the company is therefore on record that its advocacy should support its climate goals, the disclosure does not explain how this commitment is operationalised: the text describing the "process(es)… to ensure that your engagement activities are consistent with your overall climate change strategy" merely repeats the temperature-goal narrative and offers no detail on oversight bodies, monitoring mechanisms, trade-association reviews, or named individuals responsible for ensuring alignment. Consequently, the evidence shows a stated intention but provides no transparency on governance structures, reviews, or accountability mechanisms that would demonstrate how lobbying or broader policy engagement is actually managed.
View Sources
|
1
|
| Overall Assessment |
Analysis |
Score |
|
Limited
|
Renesas Electronics provides only limited insight into its climate-policy lobbying. It signals support for broad initiatives such as the Japan Climate Initiative’s push to cut national greenhouse-gas emissions “by at least 45 % below 2013 levels by 2030” and references work on “mandatory carbon reporting” through the Ministry of the Environment’s Environmental Information Disclosure Platform, but it does not name any specific bills, regulations or rulemakings it has tried to influence. The company explains that its engagement occurs mainly through participation in collective projects run by the Ministry of the Environment, yet it gives no detail on concrete lobbying methods such as letters, meetings or consultation submissions, and the Ministry is the only policymaking body identified. Desired outcomes are expressed only in broad terms—backing more ambitious national targets and stating it will “make proposals for improvements so that investors can properly obtain the necessary information, if necessary”—without clarifying the precise legislative or regulatory changes it seeks. As a result, the disclosure demonstrates minimal transparency on the policies addressed, the mechanisms used, and the specific outcomes pursued.
|
1
|