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 |
McDonald’s provides a high level of transparency around its climate-policy lobbying. It names several identifiable measures it is working on, including the “EU’s packaging and packaging waste legislation,” the U.S. “2023 Farm Bill,” the “Inflation Reduction Act” and the “EU Deforestation Regulation,” as well as broader thematic areas such as climate-related financial disclosures and renewable-energy infrastructure. The company also explains how it engages: it has been “meeting with members of the European Commission, European Parliament, Member State Permanent Representations to the EU, and national, regional and local governments across Europe,” “meeting with Members of Congress and staff to discuss climate-related topics,” and “co-leading a letter to congressional agriculture committees in the United States,” while simultaneously lobbying through trade associations such as the Together for Sustainable Packaging Alliance, the Clean Energy Buyers Association and the Consumer Goods Forum’s Forest Positive Coalition. These disclosures identify both the direct mechanisms—meetings and letters—and the indirect channels it uses, and they name the specific governmental bodies that are the targets of those efforts. Finally, McDonald’s states clear policy objectives: securing Farm Bill funding for the Foundation for Food & Agriculture Research and provisions that support “regenerative agriculture, carbon markets and curbing methane,” promoting circular-economy rules in the EU to “enhance recycling and fiber-based packaging,” and aligning its supply chain with the EU Deforestation Regulation to ensure deforestation-free sourcing. By articulating the concrete legislative changes it seeks, the methods it employs and the policies it addresses, McDonald’s demonstrates comprehensive disclosure of its climate-related lobbying activities.
|
4
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Moderate |
McDonald’s provides some insight into how it governs the alignment between its climate strategy and its external policy engagement, indicating a developing but not yet comprehensive process. The company explains that “the Global Impact department provides corporate staff leadership, coordination, and support for our global social and environmental impact policies… This group includes Global Communications, Public Policy & Government Relations… [who] help manage overall climate change strategy integration and consistency for external engagement practices, such as with NGOs or policymakers,” showing that a defined mechanism exists for checking that direct advocacy is consistent with climate goals. Oversight responsibility is attributed to named senior executives: “the Chief Global Impact Officer and Chief Sustainability & Social Impact Officer… are jointly responsible for overseeing performance, actions and goals relating to climate… and report on climate-related issues to the Board twice per year,” which indicates a clear chain of accountability for climate-related engagement activities. In addition, the Board has established a body that touches on political activity, stating that “the McDonald’s Corporation Board of Directors created the Public Policy & Strategy Committee to evaluate potential contributions in a manner consistent with the Company’s core values,” suggesting at least one formal committee reviews elements of external policy influence. However, the disclosures stop short of describing a systematic procedure for assessing or correcting misalignment in indirect lobbying; there is no public reference to reviewing trade-association positions, publishing a lobbying alignment report, or withdrawing from associations that conflict with the company’s climate strategy. Likewise, while governance of political contributions is noted, we found no evidence of a documented, recurring audit covering the full scope of climate lobbying activities. Consequently, the company shows a moderate level of lobbying-governance transparency—clear roles and a stated integration process exist, but detailed monitoring, indirect-lobbying alignment measures, and public reporting remain undisclosed.
|
2
|