Ambipar Participacoes e Empreendimentos S/A

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
Moderate	Ambipar offers a mixed picture of transparency around its climate-policy lobbying. It identifies two concrete regulatory frameworks it seeks to influence—the federal “Fertilizers National Policy” and issues arising from the international “Nagoya Protocol”—and indicates that these are addressed through discussions of biodiversity, zero illegal deforestation and land regularisation, allowing readers to understand the subjects of its advocacy. The company also explains that its engagement occurs indirectly through its leadership of the Sustainability Committee within the industry body SRB, which undertakes “political representation” before “public authorities, governments, National Congress, Ministries, Secretariats, Courts of Justice.” However, it does not go further to describe other forms of contact such as letters, consultations or individual meetings, so the mechanisms remain only partially illuminated. In contrast, Ambipar is quite explicit about the results it wants to secure, citing the need for “legal certainty for the development and full improvement of Brazilian production,” the achievement of “zero illegal deforestation,” acceleration of “the process of land regulation in Brazil,” and greater use of biological agricultural products—four distinct, measurable policy outcomes that clarify the company’s lobbying positions. Taken together, the disclosures reveal moderate‐level detail on the policies and aims of Ambipar’s climate lobbying, but provide only limited insight into the specific methods it employs to influence policymakers.	2

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Comment	Score
Moderate	Ambipar Participações e Empreendimentos S/A discloses a general framework for aligning its climate advocacy with its core business strategy and a formal oversight body, but does not provide detailed procedures or comprehensive coverage of its lobbying activities. The company explains that “all engagement activities related to climate change in the business divisions are related to the services and products in the Ambipar Participações’ portfolio,” and affirms a public commitment “to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” indicating a policy-level stance. It further states that “Ambipar maintains advice by its conduct committee so that there is compliance between broad-spectrum relationships such as this engagement,” and that “compliance assessment by such committee is the conflict management assessment mechanism for any future time,” which identifies a formal body charged with reviewing alignment. However, we found no evidence of a defined process for reviewing and managing specific lobbying activities, no indication of oversight over indirect lobbying through trade associations, and no named individual responsible for lobbying governance, which suggests that the governance framework is still limited in scope and detail.	2