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 |
Hyosung Advanced Materials Corp provides a moderate level of transparency around its climate-policy lobbying. It identifies the Korea Emission Trading System (K-ETS) — a national GHG emissions reduction scheme in Phase 3 (2021–2025) — as the specific policy it engaged on, demonstrating clarity by naming the policy and outlining its timeline and focus on emissions trading schemes. The company explains that it “actively participated in public hearings organized by industrial associations” and “shared our insights to ensure the K-ETS aligns with our sustainability goals,” targeting policymakers responsible for the K-ETS through these channels. Finally, it is explicit about the outcomes it seeks, aiming to “contribute to the development of a more robust and effective Phase 3 plan” and proposing “improvements for the allocation provisions and related Acts,” which indicates concrete objectives for its lobbying efforts.
|
2
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Strong |
Hyosung Advanced Materials discloses a defined internal procedure that explicitly seeks to align all policy-related engagement with its climate strategy, stating that it has established the “Process for ESG-related requests from external stakeholders,” through which “all stakeholders including customers, suppliers, shareholders, organizations are covered.” For government and trade-association activity it explains that “each related business unit prepares the corresponding opinion, and the climate change response officer checks its consistency to HAMC’s climate change roadmap and response strategy,” demonstrating an approval step that governs both direct lobbying of government and indirect lobbying via associations. The company also identifies accountable roles, noting that “the climate change response officer” oversees consistency checks and that, for investor enquiries, “there is an additional screening by the CFO and the IR manager,” which indicates named individuals responsible for reviewing alignment. In addition, it publicly affirms that its engagement will be conducted “in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement.” While this indicates strong governance with clear processes, the disclosure does not mention any independent or board-level review, nor does it publish a stand-alone lobbying-alignment audit or detail how misalignment with trade bodies would be resolved, so transparency could be improved.
|
3
|