Prysmian SpA – 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	Prysmian Group discloses a general commitment to align its engagement activities with climate objectives but does not articulate a formal governance process for overseeing or monitoring direct or indirect lobbying. For instance, the Group affirms “Yes” in response to being asked “Does your organization have a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement?” and notes that it “strongly endorses” the Europacable Industry Charter’s commitment to climate action, which includes endeavors to “fulfil a key role as a knowledge partner in implementing sustainable electricity” and “develop and maintain policies and strategies which create a sustainable basis for business.” The company’s description of “Institutional Relations, including corporate lobbying,” sets out general principles such as that “the company must employ transparent, lawful and autonomous accreditation channels” and must ensure that “the corporate interest involved in an ongoing decision-making process must be made explicit,” yet provides no detail about who reviews or approves these engagements or how any alignment is monitored. While Prysmian outlines a robust Board-level Sustainability Committee and an Internal Risk Management Committee overseeing climate risks, we found no evidence that either body governs its lobbying activities or trade association memberships according to its climate strategy, nor does the company disclose a specific individual responsible for lobbying oversight or any procedure for withdrawing from associations with conflicting policy positions. View Sources	D

Overall Assessment

Analysis

Score

Limited

Prysmian Group discloses a general commitment to align its engagement activities with climate objectives but does not articulate a formal governance process for overseeing or monitoring direct or indirect lobbying. For instance, the Group affirms “Yes” in response to being asked “Does your organization have a public commitment or position statement to conduct your engagement activities in line with the goals of the Paris Agreement?” and notes that it “strongly endorses” the Europacable Industry Charter’s commitment to climate action, which includes endeavors to “fulfil a key role as a knowledge partner in implementing sustainable electricity” and “develop and maintain policies and strategies which create a sustainable basis for business.” The company’s description of “Institutional Relations, including corporate lobbying,” sets out general principles such as that “the company must employ transparent, lawful and autonomous accreditation channels” and must ensure that “the corporate interest involved in an ongoing decision-making process must be made explicit,” yet provides no detail about who reviews or approves these engagements or how any alignment is monitored. While Prysmian outlines a robust Board-level Sustainability Committee and an Internal Risk Management Committee overseeing climate risks, we found no evidence that either body governs its lobbying activities or trade association memberships according to its climate strategy, nor does the company disclose a specific individual responsible for lobbying oversight or any procedure for withdrawing from associations with conflicting policy positions.

View Sources

Lobbying Transparency

Overall Assessment	Analysis	Score
Moderate	Prysmian discloses a moderate level of detail on its climate-policy lobbying. It names several specific initiatives it has worked on – including the “European Green Deal (with a focus on sustainable fibres),” the “Broadband Cost Reduction Directive,” and the EU “Recovery and Resilience Facility” – showing a willingness to identify the particular legislative or funding frameworks it seeks to influence. The company also sets out the channels it uses, citing participation in association bodies such as Europacable’s ECOE Committee and its “Carbon Task Force,” membership of Friends of Sustainable Grids and other coalitions, and the preparation and transmission of “submission of proposals, suggestions, studies, research and analysis” to “institutional representatives.” However, it rarely specifies which public authorities or individual decision-makers receive these materials, so the targets of the lobbying remain largely generic. On the outcomes sought, Prysmian refers to broad goals such as supporting the energy transition, promoting renewable-energy infrastructure, and advancing “sustainable fibres” within the Green Deal, but it does not spell out concrete legislative amendments, numerical targets, or other measurable changes it is advocating. Together, this places the company in the middle of the transparency range: it identifies the main policies it engages on and the methods it employs, yet leaves important gaps around the precise audiences it lobbies and the specific results it is trying to secure.	C