Hartford Financial Services Group Inc/The

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
Comprehensive	The Hartford is highly transparent about its climate-related lobbying. It names several concrete policy interventions it has worked on, including opposing California “state restrictions on carrier underwriting as it relates to homes in areas with high wildfire exposure,” supporting the New York Department of Financial Services’ “climate change guidance principles,” and advocating within proposed Florida legislation to “accelerate the glide path to rate adequacy for residual market property rates” and lower liability limits. The company also explains how and with whom it lobbies: it undertakes “direct communication with policymakers and their staff,” holds “meetings with senior leaders of the New York Department of Financial Services,” participates in climate-change webinars, and works “in conjunction with APCIA” to engage California lawmakers—clearly identifying state regulators and other specific targets. Finally, it articulates the results it wants to achieve, such as ensuring actuarially sound, risk-based pricing, securing “underwriting flexibility and a fair process for cancellation and non-renewal of policies,” stabilising California’s residual market, and transferring higher-value properties to the private market. By providing distinct examples of the policies addressed, the forums and partners used, and the legislative or regulatory changes sought, the company offers a comprehensive view of its climate lobbying activity.	4

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Limited	Hartford Financial Services Group has a robust corporate governance structure for climate and ESG with “the Board of Directors” bearing “oversight responsibility for The Hartford’s corporate reputation and ESG activities, including climate action,” and a cross‐enterprise Sustainability Governance Committee that “sets and helps drive execution of the company’s sustainability strategy.” While this framework ensures high‐level climate risk management and strategy execution, the company “advocates directly and through its trade association in states for price adequacy” and engages on climate mitigation and resiliency policy at multiple levels, and confirms “Yes” to having a public commitment to align engagement activities with the goals of the Paris Agreement. However, beyond this pledge, we found no evidence of a formal process—such as a climate lobbying review, alignment procedure, or dedicated oversight by a named individual or body—to ensure that these lobbying and advocacy activities are consistently aligned with its climate commitments.	1