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 |
| Limited |
Delta Electronics (Thailand) PCL offers only limited insight into its climate-policy lobbying. It acknowledges that association dues are used to “advocate emerging trend, climate change and innovation issues” and describes collaboration with bodies such as BCSD Taiwan, USGBC and ACEEE, but it does not name any specific laws, regulations or bill numbers it has tried to influence, providing only broad references to topics like energy conservation and e-mobility. The company’s description of its techniques is similarly high-level: contributions to trade associations and participation in events such as the Delta Future Industry Summit are noted, yet no concrete mechanisms—such as written submissions, meetings with identified ministries, or testimony—nor the policymaking targets are disclosed. Finally, while Delta reiterates corporate goals such as achieving 100 % renewable electricity by 2030 and “supporting the country’s shift to e-mobility,” it stops short of spelling out the specific changes in public policy it seeks, leaving the desired legislative or regulatory outcomes unclear. Taken together, the disclosures demonstrate only a basic acknowledgement of climate-related engagement without the detail needed to understand what policies are being lobbied, how, and to what end.
|
1
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Strong |
Delta Electronics Thailand describes a structured and climate-focused governance system for its policy engagement. The company’s “Delta Group Policy Influence Guidelines” state that “Delta’s position on policy engagement and lobbying projects must be reported to the CEO, COO, CSO annually to confirm that the direction is consistent with the company’s philosophy,” naming clear senior executives who receive and review lobbying updates, and adding that “all annual membership expense items above certain amount shall require final approval by the COO or CEO,” which demonstrates explicit oversight. The same guidelines embed a Paris-alignment test for both direct and indirect lobbying, requiring that “before participating in an association, Delta management should confirm that the philosophy of the association is compatible with Delta and aligned with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” and establishing a monitoring mechanism to “regularly review the participation in trade associations and direct lobbying activities in order to monitor if the association is true to their statements.” Where misalignment is found, the company pledges to “exert influence on the association to amend their position… or leave the association,” indicating an active alignment process. Financial transparency is also built in, as “the expenditures for participating in associations shall be compiled and disclosed on the company’s official website every year.” Although wider sustainability committees such as the “Risk and Sustainable Development Committee… appointed by the Board of Directors” are described, these references do not explicitly mention oversight of lobbying activities, so the core assurance still rests with the CEO/COO/CSO reporting chain. The disclosure shows strong governance of both direct lobbying and trade-association engagement, but the company does not disclose a publicly available lobbying-alignment audit or third-party review, nor evidence of completed assessments under this framework, which would strengthen transparency further.
|
3
|