ACEN Corp – Lobbying Governance & Transparency

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:

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Moderate	ACEN provides some insight into how it governs climate-related external engagement, indicating that oversight sits with defined bodies and that it has made a public commitment to align engagement with the Paris Agreement, but it stops short of describing a detailed monitoring or corrective process for its lobbying activities. The company states that the newly created “Board-level Sustainability Committee is “responsible for the oversight and regular review of the company’s sustainability strategy and issues as well as climate-related risks and opportunities” while the “Executive-level ESG Committee … advises on ESG-related matters in policymaking and monitors our performance on key ESG and climate-related metrics,” suggesting that these committees review how policy advocacy aligns with climate goals. In response to a question on alignment it adds that “ACEN aligns with four core pillars to guide its engagement activities relating to the social and economic impacts of its energy transition,” and confirms “Yes” when asked whether it has “a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.” This indicates a policy intent and identifiable oversight structures, but the disclosure does not spell out concrete mechanisms—such as systematic audits of direct lobbying, reviews of trade-association positions, or escalation procedures for misalignment—so the extent of monitoring and enforcement remains unclear. View Sources	C

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Moderate

ACEN provides some insight into how it governs climate-related external engagement, indicating that oversight sits with defined bodies and that it has made a public commitment to align engagement with the Paris Agreement, but it stops short of describing a detailed monitoring or corrective process for its lobbying activities. The company states that the newly created “Board-level Sustainability Committee is “responsible for the oversight and regular review of the company’s sustainability strategy and issues as well as climate-related risks and opportunities” while the “Executive-level ESG Committee … advises on ESG-related matters in policymaking and monitors our performance on key ESG and climate-related metrics,” suggesting that these committees review how policy advocacy aligns with climate goals. In response to a question on alignment it adds that “ACEN aligns with four core pillars to guide its engagement activities relating to the social and economic impacts of its energy transition,” and confirms “Yes” when asked whether it has “a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.” This indicates a policy intent and identifiable oversight structures, but the disclosure does not spell out concrete mechanisms—such as systematic audits of direct lobbying, reviews of trade-association positions, or escalation procedures for misalignment—so the extent of monitoring and enforcement remains unclear.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	ACEN provides only limited transparency around its climate-related lobbying. The company notes it took part in events such as Climate Week NYC and signed collective statements like the Global Renewables Alliance’s open letter and the Coal to Clean Credits Initiative, indicating that it sometimes uses public letters or participation in multistakeholder initiatives as a lobbying mechanism, but it does not identify which governments or individual policymakers those actions are directed toward or describe other channels such as meetings or consultation responses. It also fails to name any specific pieces of legislation, regulations, or policy proposals it has tried to influence, leaving readers unable to determine the scope of its policy engagement. Finally, while the company declares broad goals—urging “world leaders” to adopt more ambitious targets in line with 1.5 °C and supporting the early retirement of coal plants—these aims are expressed only in general terms without detailing the concrete policy changes, timelines or quantitative targets it seeks. Together, these gaps mean ACEN’s disclosure offers only a high-level view of intent and activity, without the detail necessary to understand its precise lobbying positions or effectiveness.	D