Lobbying Governance
| Overall Assessment | Analysis | Score |
|---|---|---|
| Limited |
Comfort Systems USA provides only a minimal indication that it considers the alignment of its external engagement with climate objectives, stating that “while Comfort Systems doesn't have a formalized climate change strategy, we support the efforts of increasing energy efficiency in the trade associations we are part of, which in turn helps to reduce overall emissions and aligns with our own objectives.” This sentence demonstrates a basic intention to keep at least some indirect lobbying activities consistent with its internal goals, but it does not describe any concrete procedures, monitoring steps, or escalation mechanisms for doing so. The company outlines general sustainability oversight—“Oversight of the Company's sustainability practices falls under the purview of the Nominating, Governance, and Sustainability Committee of the Board of Directors” and reports that a management-level Sustainability Committee “tracks and reports the progress of the Company's sustainability program and plan”—yet none of these committees are explicitly tasked with reviewing or approving lobbying or trade-association positions. Moreover, the company confirms that it has “No” public commitment to conduct engagement in line with the Paris Agreement and “does not plan to have one in the next two years,” underscoring the absence of a formal climate-lobbying framework. Because the disclosure is limited to a single, general statement of supportive intent and lacks detail on oversight, monitoring, or alignment processes for either direct or indirect lobbying, this indicates only very limited governance of climate-related lobbying activities.
View Sources
|
D |