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 |
| Moderate |
Foschini Group provides some transparency around the mechanisms it uses to influence climate policy, describing its engagement "through TFG’s involvement with BUSA," supplemented by verbal and written submissions and attendance at industry meetings in the South African Parliament. The company identifies a single piece of climate legislation—"South Africa’s Climate Change Bill"—as the focus of its lobbying but does not disclose any other policies or confirm that this is the only climate policy it has engaged on. In addition, TFG does not lay out the specific policy changes or amendments it is seeking; instead, it offers a general observation that "the policy lacks specificity in order to support long-term corporate planning associated with the risks and opportunities of climate change," without detailing targeted outcomes or objectives.
|
2
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Moderate |
Foschini Group (TFG) provides some insight into how its policy engagement is governed, indicating a moderate level of structure but limited explicit focus on climate-lobbying alignment. The company states that "TFG submits comments and lobbies on proposed changes to regulations" and that it "maintains constructive relationships with key government departments, closely monitors policy developments and where applicable submits comments on new legislation through industry representative bodies," outlining at least a basic process for managing engagement activities. Oversight is assigned to board-level structures: the Social and Ethics Committee is described as "responsible for assisting the Supervisory Board with the monitoring and reporting of social, ethical, transformational and sustainability practices" and its charter includes "reviewing, monitoring and reporting on TFG’s activities with regard to any relevant legislation," while "feedback on issues is reported as per TFG’s Enterprise Risk Management framework." This signals that lobbying activities, including climate-related ones, are escalated through formal governance channels. However, the disclosures do not describe a systematic mechanism for testing whether direct or trade-association lobbying positions are aligned with the company’s climate strategy, and TFG acknowledges that it has "No" public commitment "to conduct [its] engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement." There is also no evidence of trade-association reviews, escalation procedures for misalignment, or a dedicated climate-lobbying audit. Consequently, while the presence of a named committee and reporting pathway indicates governance, the absence of detailed monitoring criteria, alignment checks, or public reporting on outcomes limits transparency and robustness.
|
2
|