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 |
Ryoden Corp is fairly transparent about its climate-policy lobbying. It identifies a concrete policy forum it works through – Japan’s Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry’s “GX League” – showing that its engagement is focused on this government-backed platform for green transformation. The company also explains in detail how it engages, describing participation in dialogue forums, applications to and proposals for market-rule working groups, and the submission of formal opinions to the GX League Secretariat, thereby revealing both the mechanisms used and the specific governmental target of those efforts. Ryoden further spells out what it wants to achieve: it seeks quantifiable reductions in its direct and indirect emissions by 2025 and 2030, intends to publish granular emissions data, and aims to help create new carbon-neutral business opportunities and shape market rules that are consistent with the Paris Agreement. Although only one policy initiative is named, the combination of clear mechanisms and multiple stated outcomes demonstrates a strong overall level of lobbying disclosure.
|
3
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Moderate |
Ryoden Corp discloses a specific internal mechanism for checking that its interactions with outside bodies are consistent with its climate strategy, stating that “気候変動関連の外部組織との協働にあたっては、新規事業推進室において当社の気候変動に関する戦略や取組みと矛盾していないか確認、審議を行い、外部組織との協働の決定を行いました,” and clarifying that the New Business Promotion Office “新規事業推進室は、カーボンニュートラル等、気候変動関連を含む新規事業を推進する部署であり、気候変動関連の外部組織との協働を図っています.” This shows a defined process and identifies a named department responsible for reviewing and approving external engagements so they do not conflict with the company’s climate objectives, indicating moderate governance of at least some indirect advocacy activities. However, the company “does not have a public commitment or position statement to conduct engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement” and “do[es] not plan to have one in the next two years,” and it provides no information on how direct lobbying is monitored, whether trade-association positions are assessed, or whether board-level oversight exists. As a result, while a governance mechanism and responsible body are disclosed, the overall framework remains limited in scope and transparency.
|
2
|