Budweiser Brewing Co APAC Ltd – 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
Limited	Budweiser Brewing Co APAC discloses a high-level intention to keep its “engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement” as confirmed by the statement: "Does your organization have a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement?[…]Yes". However, the evidence provided about its Audit and Risk Committee, Sustainability Committee and Risk Committee focuses on "overseeing the financial reporting system, internal control procedures and risk management" and on reviewing "safety, environment and quality updates"; none of these descriptions mention monitoring or managing political lobbying activities. There is also no disclosure of a policy or mechanism that assesses the alignment of either direct lobbying or participation in trade associations with the company’s climate objectives, nor is any individual or committee identified as being responsible for such reviews. In short, beyond the Paris-alignment statement, the company does not disclose a concrete governance process—such as regular lobbying reviews, alignment criteria, board sign-off, or remedial actions—for ensuring its advocacy is consistent with its climate goals, indicating only limited transparency on lobbying governance. View Sources	D

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Limited

Budweiser Brewing Co APAC discloses a high-level intention to keep its “engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement” as confirmed by the statement: "Does your organization have a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement?[…]Yes". However, the evidence provided about its Audit and Risk Committee, Sustainability Committee and Risk Committee focuses on "overseeing the financial reporting system, internal control procedures and risk management" and on reviewing "safety, environment and quality updates"; none of these descriptions mention monitoring or managing political lobbying activities. There is also no disclosure of a policy or mechanism that assesses the alignment of either direct lobbying or participation in trade associations with the company’s climate objectives, nor is any individual or committee identified as being responsible for such reviews. In short, beyond the Paris-alignment statement, the company does not disclose a concrete governance process—such as regular lobbying reviews, alignment criteria, board sign-off, or remedial actions—for ensuring its advocacy is consistent with its climate goals, indicating only limited transparency on lobbying governance.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Limited	Budweiser Brewing Co APAC provides only limited insight into its climate-policy lobbying. It says it has taken part in closed-door discussions with the Hong Kong Stock Exchange on Scope 3 disclosure methodologies and the TCFD framework and refers more broadly to working with “industry players, policymakers, NGOs and other key stakeholders,” but it does not describe additional mechanisms such as formal submissions, letters or public consultations, nor does it identify the specific government departments or individual decision-makers it seeks to influence. On substance, the company points to general climate initiatives—the 2060 Carbon Neutrality Commitment in China, Hong Kong’s 2050 Net-Zero pledge, South Korea’s Carbon Neutrality Act and India’s 2070 target—but stops short of naming particular bills, regulations or rulemakings it has actively lobbied. Likewise, its policy positions remain aspirational; it indicates support for stronger climate-related reporting and for achieving net-zero by 2040, yet it does not spell out the concrete legislative or regulatory changes it is advocating, the amendments it wants adopted, or the quantitative outcomes it seeks. The absence of specific policies, detailed lobbying channels and clearly articulated goals leaves the overall disclosure relatively sparse.	D