Direct Lobbying Transparency
Overall Assessment | Comment | Score |
---|---|---|
Strong | Dow Inc provides a relatively detailed picture of its climate-policy advocacy. It identifies several concrete policy files it works on, including the passage of California Senate Bill 54 on plastic pollution, engagement with the European Commission’s End-of-Life Vehicles Directive, and support for finalising the Paris Agreement Rulebook and related global carbon-market provisions. In addition, the company publicly backs instruments such as “an economy wide market-based price on carbon” and “carbon border adjustment mechanisms,” and it publishes a list of its top public-policy priorities, all of which clarifies the scope of its lobbying activity. Dow also describes multiple, specific channels it uses to influence these measures: testimony by its Energy & Climate vice-president before the U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, coalition and NGO work that “actively participated in the passage of California Senate Bill 54,” discussions with other heavy-industry players and governments “to start a voluntary emissions trading system,” and indirect engagement through bodies such as IETA and the American Chemistry Council. These examples name identifiable targets—the U.S. Senate, the California Legislature and Governor Newsom, and EU regulators—demonstrating clear disclosure of both mechanisms and audiences. Finally, the company sets out the changes it is seeking: completion of the Paris Rulebook to “create global carbon markets,” establishment of a voluntary ETS for hard-to-abate sectors with revenues channelled to low-carbon technology, mandatory climate-risk reporting based on TCFD and the GHG Protocol, and extended-producer-responsibility regimes that fund waste-management infrastructure and set science-based recycling targets. By pairing these specific desired outcomes with its stated mechanisms and policy references, Dow shows a strong level of transparency around its climate-related lobbying activities. | 3 |