Ayala Land Inc – Lobbying Governance & Transparency

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:

Lobbying Governance

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
None	Ayala Land Inc. does not disclose any structured process for governing its engagement or lobbying activities in alignment with its climate change strategy. While the company reports that it "engage[s] with various stakeholders to share best practices and collaborate with various stakeholders in enabling and leading the transition to a low-carbon economy," and details activities such as "Directly engaging with policy makers," including "Participation as resource person on best practices and strategies to address climate change issues during public events and workshops organized by the Climate Change Commission of the Philippine Government" and acting as "Speaker during roundtable discussions on forest carbon under REDD+," there is no mention of a defined policy, oversight body, monitoring procedure, or accountability mechanism for these interactions. Likewise, although it notes "Working with organizations that also provide inputs to the government on climate-related policies and issues," the company does not disclose any governance framework, nor does it name an individual or committee responsible for reviewing or approving such engagement. The response that "No, but we plan to have one in the next two years" indicates that it currently lacks a public commitment to align its engagement activities with the goals of the Paris Agreement. View Sources	E

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

None

Ayala Land Inc. does not disclose any structured process for governing its engagement or lobbying activities in alignment with its climate change strategy. While the company reports that it "engage[s] with various stakeholders to share best practices and collaborate with various stakeholders in enabling and leading the transition to a low-carbon economy," and details activities such as "Directly engaging with policy makers," including "Participation as resource person on best practices and strategies to address climate change issues during public events and workshops organized by the Climate Change Commission of the Philippine Government" and acting as "Speaker during roundtable discussions on forest carbon under REDD+," there is no mention of a defined policy, oversight body, monitoring procedure, or accountability mechanism for these interactions. Likewise, although it notes "Working with organizations that also provide inputs to the government on climate-related policies and issues," the company does not disclose any governance framework, nor does it name an individual or committee responsible for reviewing or approving such engagement. The response that "No, but we plan to have one in the next two years" indicates that it currently lacks a public commitment to align its engagement activities with the goals of the Paris Agreement.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	Ayala Land provides some insight into its climate-policy lobbying, but the level of detail is limited. It identifies one specific policy focus—the “Philippine National REDD+ Strategy” (also described as the “Guidelines on REDD+ system in the Philippines”)—showing that its engagement centres on forest-carbon regulation. The company explains how it lobbies, noting activities such as “Participating as a resource person on best practices and strategies to address climate change issues during public events and workshops organized by the Climate Change Commission of the Philippine Government” and “speaking during roundtable discussions on forest carbon under REDD+,” and it names its target audiences as “government organizations in charge of implementing the REDD+ program in the Philippines.” However, it does not spell out concrete legislative or regulatory changes it is pursuing; its stated aim is broadly to provide “Support with no exceptions” and to improve strategies to address climate change, without setting out measurable outcomes or specific amendments it seeks. This combination of a single clearly named policy, two clearly described engagement channels and audiences, and only general statements about desired results results in a limited overall level of transparency.	D