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 |
Winbond Electronics offers a reasonable but not exhaustive picture of its climate-policy lobbying. It identifies the specific law it has engaged on – the “Climate Change Response Act” in Taiwan, with a focus on the forthcoming carbon-tax provisions – but does not indicate whether this is its sole area of public-policy advocacy. The company is clear about how and where it seeks to exert influence, describing both internal industry-association work – “discussion with other member companies of ASIP & TSIA for reducing GHG emissions” – and direct “negotiations with the EPA” through public hearings and visits, explicitly naming Taiwan’s Environmental Protection Administration as its governmental target. It also spells out the concrete changes it wants, advocating that “government carbon charges should cover all sectors, not specific industrial sectors” and calling for greater clarity on the “supporting measures of the regulations.” Taken together, these disclosures show solid transparency on mechanisms and desired outcomes, while the limited range of policies covered leaves some gaps.
|
2
|
| Overall Assessment |
Comment |
Score |
| Limited |
Winbond Electronics discloses only very limited information on how it governs its public-policy engagement. The company states that it has “a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement,” indicating an intention to align its advocacy with climate objectives, but provides no detail on the mechanisms, oversight structures, or review procedures that would ensure this alignment. The available disclosures focus on broader ESG governance, noting that “the ESG Committee, composed of the Chairman and all independent directors, guides the direction of Winbond‘s sustainable development strategy,” yet none of the cited passages describe how lobbying activities—either direct or through trade associations—are monitored, approved, or audited, nor do they identify any specific individual or committee charged with overseeing lobbying alignment. Consequently, while the Paris-alignment commitment suggests some awareness of climate-related advocacy issues, the company does not disclose the processes, accountability measures, or monitoring needed to demonstrate a robust lobbying-governance framework.
|
1
|