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 |
| Limited |
Japan Real Estate Investment Corp provides a basic but limited window into its climate-policy lobbying. It identifies one specific area of engagement – discussion of a carbon tax within the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism’s “ESG-TCFD Working Group for the Real Estate Sector” – but lists no other climate policies. The company explains a single lobbying route, namely the direct participation of its Head of ESG Office in that government-convened working group, thereby naming both the mechanism (working-group participation) and the policymaking target (MLIT). On desired outcomes, it states that it “supports carbon taxes without exceptions” and seeks to shape industry guidance on how real-estate businesses disclose climate-related risks and opportunities, indicating two clear policy objectives. However, the disclosure stops short of detailing additional lobbying channels, other policy initiatives, or further outcomes, so the overall transparency remains limited.
|
1
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Moderate |
Japan Real Estate Investment Corp. discloses a basic governance framework that links its climate‐related policy engagement to internal decision-making, but the information remains high-level and lacks detail on how alignment is systematically assessed. The company explains that it maintains a “サステナビリティ委員会” composed of the CEO, the Head of Sustainability Promotion and other department heads, which meets “原則として年4回” under a PDCA cycle, and that “サステナビリティ委員会で検討された内容は…投資法人の役員会へ年1回報告されます,” indicating a named committee and board oversight of sustainability-related engagement. It states that “The Sustainability Committee and the Board of Directors discuss climate change issues and business strategies, and the outcomes are presented by our member executive officer to the ARES for discussion with other member companies…We perform activities based on this PDCA cycle,” which shows an internal loop intended to keep indirect lobbying through the Association for Real Estate Securitization consistent with corporate climate strategy. Direct engagement is also referenced: “the Head of our ESG Office participated in the ‘ESG-TCFD Working Group for the Real Estate Sector’ supervised by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism,” demonstrating involvement in a government policy forum aligned with climate objectives. The company further confirms that it has “a public commitment…to conduct [its] engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.” However, the disclosure does not describe any formal methodology for checking whether trade associations’ positions conflict with the company’s climate goals, nor does it mention publishing alignment reviews, corrective actions, or withdrawal criteria, so the scope and rigor of monitoring remain unclear. Consequently, while there is evidence of a defined process, responsible bodies and some attention to both direct and indirect climate-related engagement, the level of transparency and detail is moderate rather than comprehensive.
|
2
|