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 |
AstraZeneca provides a highly detailed picture of its climate-related lobbying. It names multiple identifiable measures it has engaged on, including the UK Sustainability Disclosure Regulations, the planned UK 2030 ban on internal-combustion-engine vehicles, the EU Emissions Trading Scheme, the EU and US F-Gas regulation reviews, and Japan’s Act on Utilisation of Sea Areas for Renewables, among others, demonstrating full transparency on the policies it targets. The company also explains how it seeks to influence those measures: it describes "attending meetings directly with the Transition Plan Taskforce (TPT)", high-level discussions hosted by its CEO with "industry CEOs, government officials, and leaders from WHO, UNICEF and NHS England" at COP27, publication of a white paper to inform UK life-sciences policy, participation in international summits and trade associations such as RE100 and EV100, and direct engagement with the NHS and other public bodies, clearly identifying both the mechanisms and the policymaking audiences. Finally, AstraZeneca is explicit about the concrete outcomes it pursues, for example advocating a "phased transition period to at least 2030" for medicinal exemptions under F-Gas rules, seeking to "help shape policy and guidance for others to establish climate transition plans of their own", pressing for "government subsidies for clean energy vehicles", and promoting economy-wide adoption of science-based targets that limit warming to 1.5 °C. This breadth and precision across policies, methods and desired results demonstrate a comprehensive level of transparency in the company’s climate-policy lobbying disclosures.
|
4
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Moderate |
AstraZeneca discloses a set of internal expectations that link its public-policy engagement to its climate strategy, indicating a moderate level of governance over climate-related lobbying. The company states that “Any engagement is consistent with our Global Code of Ethics” and that “Any interactions with policy makers (direct and indirect) must be in line with our stated climate commitments,” showing a clear procedural requirement to align both direct and trade-association lobbying with its climate goals. It further explains that such engagement “will either be in open forum or via our trade associations… and [is] conducted by individuals that either own our climate policy (i.e. subject matter experts; SMEs) or more senior executives who have been adequately briefed,” which identifies responsible roles and implies an internal sign-off mechanism. In addition, AstraZeneca emphasises evidence-based advocacy, noting “We do not lobby policy makers on climate related issues without scientific data to support the need for regulatory review,” reinforcing an integrity check on lobbying content. However, the disclosure does not specify a formal oversight body such as the Board or a dedicated committee, nor does it describe a recurring review or audit of trade-association positions, so the extent of monitoring and accountability remains unclear. The company also “has a public commitment… to conduct [its] engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” but it does not publish a detailed lobbying-alignment report or outline procedures for addressing misalignment. Overall, the information evidences a policy and some mechanisms for alignment, yet lacks the deeper oversight structures and transparency that would indicate a stronger governance framework.
|
2
|