Direct Lobbying Transparency
Overall Assessment | Comment | Score |
---|---|---|
Moderate | Pernod Ricard provides a fair amount of detail on the climate-related policy files it tries to influence. It names several concrete initiatives – the EU Green Deal (including elements such as climate-related reporting and transition plans), the EU Commission’s “Product Environmental Footprint” work, and a French regulatory process to secure permission for a renewable-energy distillation method for cognac – giving readers a clear view of where the company’s lobbying is focused. The company also explains how it seeks to influence these measures, combining direct contact with regulators and indirect engagement through trade associations. It notes that it is “engaging the cognac industry to obtain from the regulatory authority the right to test and develop an alternative way of conducting the double distillation with renewable energy” and that it works “with EU policymakers mainly through our relevant trade associations,” while listing bodies such as SpiritsEurope, MEDEF and AFEP to which it pays membership fees. Although these disclosures identify both mechanisms (direct engagement, trade-association advocacy) and targets (EU policymakers, the French regulatory authority), only two distinct mechanisms are outlined and the descriptions are sometimes high-level (no mention of specific meetings, letters, or consultations). On desired outcomes, the company sets out one clear objective – regulatory approval for a carbon-neutral distillation process – but beyond this offers mostly broad aspirations for “progressive policies” that enable the green transition without spelling out concrete legislative changes. Taken together, the disclosures show a moderate level of transparency: the policies being lobbied and the channels used are reasonably well described, yet the company is less specific about the precise results it seeks and the detailed tactics it employs. | 2 |