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 |
| Strong |
Nippon Yusen KK provides a detailed account of its climate-related advocacy, naming concrete measures it has tried to influence. It discloses work on the “2023 IMO GHG削減戦略,” as well as efforts under Japan’s Green Innovation Fund Project to create national rules on supplying ammonia as a marine fuel, giving readers clear sight of at least two identifiable climate policies. The company sets out a variety of engagement routes, including direct collaboration with the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism, leadership of the Japan Shipowners’ Association “GHGタスクフォース,” submissions to the International Maritime Organization, and, as it states, “lobbying relevant authorities to formulate rules on supplying ammonia as a marine fuel.” Naming targets such as MLIT and the IMO, and describing activities like drafting proposals and roadmaps, shows the mechanisms and audiences for its lobbying. NYK also articulates the policy outcomes it seeks: the IMO’s adoption of a “2050年ネット・ゼロエミッション” goal with interim reductions of “20-30% by 2030” and “70-80% by 2040,” and the creation of a regulatory framework to enable ammonia bunkering. By specifying the policies, channels and concrete results it pursues, the company demonstrates a strong level of transparency around its climate lobbying.
|
3
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Moderate |
Nippon Yusen KK has established an ESG Strategy Headquarters and Committee to integrate environment-related issues into its decision-making, but it does not articulate a dedicated lobbying governance body or transparent review mechanism specifically for climate lobbying. For example, the company explains that “the ESG Strategy Committee meets monthly, and the company’s Management Meeting discusses ESG management and strategies and makes decisions,” and affirms “Yes” when asked if it has a “public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.” It also states that “before engaging with policymakers or industry associations, we carefully examine whether their actions are consistent with our relevant nature-related strategies before making a decision on whether or not to proceed,” demonstrating a process for aligning advocacy with its broader ESG goals. However, the company does not disclose a named individual or formal oversight body that reviews or approves lobbying activities, and we found no evidence of a routine auditing process, board sign-off on lobbying plans, or a dedicated report on climate lobbying alignment. This indicates that while alignment procedures exist, they are not supported by a clearly defined, transparent lobbying governance framework.
|
2
|